Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

D.E.A. Launders Mexican Profits of Drug Cartels

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
 
alp227 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-04-11 01:19 AM
Original message
D.E.A. Launders Mexican Profits of Drug Cartels
Source: NYT

Undercover American narcotics agents have laundered or smuggled millions of dollars in drug proceeds as part of Washingtons expanding role in Mexicos fight against drug cartels, according to current and former federal law enforcement officials.

The agents, primarily with the Drug Enforcement Administration, have handled shipments of hundreds of thousands of dollars in illegal cash across borders, those officials said, to identify how criminal organizations move their money, where they keep their assets and, most important, who their leaders are.

They said agents had deposited the drug proceeds in accounts designated by traffickers, or in shell accounts set up by agents.

The officials said that while the D.E.A. conducted such operations in other countries, it began doing so in Mexico only in the past few years. The high-risk activities raise delicate questions about the agencys effectiveness in bringing down drug kingpins, underscore diplomatic concerns about Mexican sovereignty, and blur the line between surveillance and facilitating crime. As it launders drug money, the agency often allows cartels to continue their operations over months or even years before making seizures or arrests.

Read more: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/04/world/americas/us-dru...
Refresh | +84 Recommendations Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
RZM Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-04-11 01:36 AM
Response to Original message
1. One gets the impression that Washington is all over the place with their cartel policies
This and especially the gun walking debacle have resulted in some really bad headlines. I think it's less incompetence and more the fact that they are only minimally engaged with a truly enormous situation. Don't really know what's to be done here. I'm all for legalizing everything, but that's not going to happen soon, nor would it break the grip these gangs have on Mexican civil society.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Octafish Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-04-11 10:16 AM
Original message
DEA Agents Agree: CIA means Cocaine Importation Agency
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Selena Harris Donating Member (273 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-04-11 03:31 PM
Response to Original message
56. Octafish.please read my comment #55
You have so very many impressive posts on so many subjects,but the ones on the Bush enterprises are legendary.And it is YOUR journals on Bout to which I am referring in #55.

Bravissimo,Octa!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Hotler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-05-11 08:39 AM
Response to Original message
93. +1 again..... Thank you Octafish.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
TheWraith Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-04-11 01:37 PM
Response to Reply #1
48. The problem is that "Washington" isn't all one thing.
People far too often think of the federal government as being one thing, a unified entity with a unified purpose and decision-making tree. In actuality, it's dozens of agencies with hundreds of decision-makers, and territorial squabbles both between agencies and between decision-makers within an agency. It's like "Gunwalker" that you referenced. Saying "the government decided to smuggle guns to the cartels" isn't accurate--someone in the ATF decided to smuggle guns to the cartels. Probably as a means to get more power and influence for the ATF. Or you've got this, where a federal agency ends up laundering drug money for the cartels, out of an attempt to STOP money laundering. And because of territoriality, there's fewer people in the loop to say "Jeez, this is a really bad idea."
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
RZM Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-04-11 01:51 PM
Response to Reply #48
50. I was trying to intimate that fact in my headline
You're right, governments/bureaucracies have many moving parts and quite often different elements are not on the same page or sometimes even working at cross-purposes. That's what I meant by 'all over the place.'
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Uncle Joe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-05-11 12:07 PM
Response to Reply #48
103. Yes, but when your overall policy ie; "War on Drugs" is draconian, dysfunctional and corruptive
to begin with, you will have more draconian, dysfunctional and corruptive incidents within different branches of government taking place, given enough time, government in general will morph into one thing as it becomes increasingly disconnected from an alienated citizenry.

This is the kind of environment that spawns the immoral, corruptive concept of a for profit prison system; as just one more facet of the overall disastrous policy creating a direct loop between imprisoning the American People for profit which in turn feeds the "lawmakers" via bribery/lobbying money and thus enables the morphing to take place.

Meanwhile, organized crime/cartels; are enriched and empowered to adversely affect the people's government either through overt or covert means, eventually I see the "War on Drugs" as allowing them to take over.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
SteveM Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-04-11 02:04 PM
Response to Reply #1
51. It/They sure are with their "gun smuggling" operations. Pheww. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Callisto32 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-04-11 05:19 AM
Response to Original message
2. End the double standard.
If it is a crime when "civilians" do it, it is a crime when government agents do it.

If you have to commit crimes to "fight" crimes, you are doing something wrong.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Zhade Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-04-11 05:24 AM
Response to Original message
3. LMITED HANGOUT.
Classic blackops CYA. Assume it's a hundredfold worse.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
MaineDeadHead Donating Member (21 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-04-11 05:51 AM
Response to Reply #3
4. Also Plausible Deniability
The masses are much more likely to believe it was an operation than what it actually was - corruption. It is naive and racist to think that DEA agents are somehow more immune to the wealth and other temptations of the cartels than their counterparts to the south.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
a la izquierda Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-04-11 05:58 AM
Response to Reply #4
5. Ain't that the truth. eom
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Hotler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-04-11 07:57 AM
Response to Reply #4
8. Welcome to DU. eom.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
DebJ Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-04-11 08:06 AM
Response to Reply #4
11. The DEA agents that I know are brave, courageous, honest,
dedicated, hard-working people who face threats to their own lives and families all the time. I admire them and am very glad
they are out there doing this work.

There is no profession that has no sinners, because all professions are filled by people. But I have to speak out when people come so close to saying that all or many police or politicians or whomever are corrupt, or even begin a conversation that may go that way. Hard as it is for some to believe, money and personal gain are really not the be-all or end-all for millions of good people.

The job of a DEA agent, to me, is incredibly frightening. I could never do it.

But I am so damn glad they do, and so are the mothers of drug addicts that I know.

How in the world legalizing cocaine and meth and heroin would improve the lives of the people I know who are
addicts, or the lives of their families, is just beyond my comprehension. Those who say it would solve the
problem never have explained this to me, except those who say let all the druggies do it till they die,
Darwinism, and I can't accept that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
TatonkaJames Donating Member (502 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-04-11 10:33 AM
Response to Reply #11
25. RE : The DEA agents that I know are brave, courageous, honest,
I used to believe that everyone in politics or public service are honest until 1972 when I learned Nixon was covering up his crimes.
If corruption can reach the top of government, which is more rampant today (look at those who have fallen from grace in both
party's in recent years). There are always going to be good apples, but for the most part, everyone is trying to make an easy buck.

As for legalizing drugs improving peoples lives ? Answer me this; how does alcohol improve peoples lives ?
Drugs are illegal but anyone of age can drive to a store, buy liquor, get in their car, start drinking and kill a family ? Doesn't make sense.
When they tried prohibition crime rose, people were killed, innocents too. Then they figured it out and made it legal plus gained tax
revenue's from it.
If drugs were legal, they would have dispensaries like medical marijuana places that hardcore druggies would have to get counseling
before they get their drugs, they can unknowingly have the content lowered so they don't feel the withdrawals perhaps. At least they
aren't out stealing all the time and more importantly puts the drug cartels out of business.
These are some of the reasons alcohol were legalized. Now it's time to do it for drugs or the druggies will stay in the shadows never
getting help and crime continues, plus after $1 Trillion dollars spent on The War on Drugs, what has it gotten us ? We're worse off.
It's time we grow up and stop ignoring the 800 pound gorilla, or make alcohol illegal and see what happens.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
zeemike Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-04-11 11:14 AM
Response to Reply #25
36. You are talking about destroying a multi billion dollar industry
Who exist just because things like drug are illigal...there are companies that specialize in providing equipment and things for law enforcement to use to fight drugs...not to mention the millions and probably billions of money and property that are seized from people caught with drugs...and the many privet prisons that rely on drug offenders to make them big bucks.
The rules of our system are simple...once an industry is established it can never be stoped when it has enough money to lobby congress to continue the flow of money to it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Peace Patriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-04-11 11:21 AM
Response to Reply #25
37. TatonkaJames, I am SURE that there are honest DEA agents...
...as well as honest FBI agents, and "Homeland Security" agents, and other honest men and women within the "military-industrial complex" and the "prison-industrial complex" involved in the U.S. "war on drugs." Many of them! But THEY are not the problem. The problem is AT THE TOP and with those above and behind those at the top, who are PROFITING from the U.S. "war on drugs" both overtly (war/prison profiteers) and covertly (TRILLIONS of dollars in illicit money).

I would NEVER make a Darwinian argument that drug addicts should be allowed to destroy themselves (and their families) as social policy. That would be as disgusting a policy as the "war on drugs" is. Drug addicts are ILL--just as alcoholics are. But criminalizing them and their "sources" is abominably bad policy. It is a FAILED policy. It helps neither drug addicts nor their families nor society as a whole. Like Prohibition, all it does is make the criminal trade more profitable and more violent--meanwhile providing the excuse to militarize our society, take away our civil rights and quell rebellion against injustice.

Just think about this for minute. The U.S. (Bush Junta) spent $7 BILLION in U.S. taxpayer money on the "war on drugs" in Colombia, with NO abeyance in the cocaine trade (and huge "collateral damage" against innocent people). The U.S. has spent a total in the TRILLIONS throughout Latin America on the same "war" and on imprisoning people here, with long sentences, most of which are for non-violent drug possession or trade. What if that money had been used instead on drug rehab, medical care, re-training, jobs programs, child care, education and creating a society in which the poor and the young feel hope in their future?

The "war on drugs" has not only WASTED all that money, it has created a situation in which really bad people--people who gained control of our government--could corrupt that "war" just as they did, for instance, in their war on Iraq, where the tip of the iceberg is the billions of U.S. taxpayer dollars gone missing in Iraq!

What I'm saying is "think it through." No one is saying--and I am certainly not saying--that every DEA agent is corrupt. But the honest people in this "war" have an uphill battle (to say the least) accomplishing its stated purpose--stopping the drug trade. The reason that it's an uphill battle--indeed, in my opinion, an impossible task--is that it is a BAD and highly corruptible POLICY, run by people who themselves are NOT ON THE LINE--they are fatcats sending DEA agents and others out to fight a battle that can't be won and some of them--particularly Bush Junta leaders and operatives--PROFIT from the drug trade being ILLEGAL. They profit directly (in war contracts) and indirectly (in corruption, diverting trillions of illicit dollars through their banks and pockets).

Time to end this! Time to use our tax dollars POSITIVELY--to help people, to enhance their civil and human rights--and the only way that I can see to do this is to END criminalization of drugs and start building hospitals instead of prisons, and start healing people instead of putting them into one of these "privatized" hell-hole cells. It's time to create a positive, progressive society, not one that declares "wars" that it cannot win and then sucks up all our resources into a few fatcat empires.

Latin American leaders are moving in this direction. They see the great damage that has been done to their societies by the U.S. "war on drugs." The president of Colombia (a rightwinger but not mafia) recently said that he would support decriminalization. So have a number of other LatAm leaders--across the political spectrum. It's time. It really is--NOT to abandon drug addicts and other victims of the drug trade--but to look at the problem and address the problem in an entirely new way--one that will be more humane and one that has a chance of working.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Xicano Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-04-11 12:11 PM
Response to Reply #25
42. RE: "As for legalizing drugs improving peoples lives? Answer me this"
Who's the owner of YOUR body? What gives me or anyone else any right to tell you what you can or cannot do with YOUR own body? What does the word "freedom" mean to you? Is autonomy over one's own body a necessary requirement for freedom or is outlawing autonomy over one's own body consistent with freedom?

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
TatonkaJames Donating Member (502 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-04-11 01:37 PM
Response to Reply #25
47. Pharma Drugs kill more people than illegal drugs
The reports findings track with similar studies by the federal Drug Enforcement Administration, which has found that roughly seven million Americans are abusing prescription drugs. If accurate, that would be an increase of 80 percent in six years and more than the total abusing cocaine, heroin, hallucinogens, Ecstasy and inhalants.


June 14, 2008
Legal Drugs Kill Far More Than Illegal, Florida Says

By DAMIEN CAVE
MIAMI From Scarface to Miami Vice, Floridas drug problem has been portrayed as the story of a single narcotic: cocaine. But for Floridians, prescription drugs are increasingly a far more lethal habit.

An analysis of autopsies in 2007 released this week by the Florida Medical Examiners Commission found that the rate of deaths caused by prescription drugs was three times the rate of deaths caused by all illicit drugs combined.

Law enforcement officials said that the shift toward prescription-drug abuse, which began here about eight years ago, showed no sign of letting up and that the state must do more to control it.

You have health care providers involved, you have doctor shoppers, and then there are crimes like robbing drug shipments, said Jeff Beasley, a drug intelligence inspector for the Florida Department of Law Enforcement, which co-sponsored the study. There is a multitude of ways to get these drugs, and thats what makes things complicated.

The reports findings track with similar studies by the federal Drug Enforcement Administration, which has found that roughly seven million Americans are abusing prescription drugs. If accurate, that would be an increase of 80 percent in six years and more than the total abusing cocaine, heroin, hallucinogens, Ecstasy and inhalants.

The Florida report analyzed 168,900 deaths statewide. Cocaine, heroin and all methamphetamines caused 989 deaths, it found, while legal opioids strong painkillers in brand-name drugs like Vicodin and OxyContin caused 2,328.

Drugs with benzodiazepine, mainly depressants like Valium and Xanax, led to 743 deaths. Alcohol was the most commonly occurring drug, appearing in the bodies of 4,179 of the dead and judged the cause of death of 466 fewer than cocaine (843) but more than methamphetamine (25) and marijuana (0).

The study also found that while the number of people who died with heroin in their bodies increased 14 percent in 2007, to 110, deaths related to the opioid oxycodone increased 36 percent, to 1,253.

Florida scrutinizes drug-related deaths more closely than do other states, and so there is little basis for comparison with them.

It has also witnessed several highly publicized cases in recent years that have highlighted the problem. Only last year, an accidental prescription drug overdose killed Anna Nicole Smith in Broward County.

Still, the state has lagged in enforcement. Thirty-eight other states have approved prescription drug monitoring programs that track sales. Florida lawmakers have repeatedly considered similar legislation, but privacy concerns have kept it from passing.

As a result, federal, state and local law enforcement officials say, Florida has become a source of prescription drugs that are illegally sold across the country.

The monitoring plan is our priority effort, but that is not enough, William H. Janes, the Florida director of drug control, said in a statement accompanying the study. He said Florida was also looking at ways to curb illegal Internet sales and to encourage doctors and pharmacists to identify potential abusers.

Some local police departments have taken a more novel approach.

In Broward County on May 31, deputies completed a drug takeback in which $5 Wal-Mart, CVS or Walgreens gift cards were distributed to 150 people who cleaned out their medicine cabinets and turned in unused drugs in an effort to keep them out of young peoples hands.

The abuse has reached epidemic proportions, said Lisa McElhaney, a sergeant in the pharmaceutical drug diversion unit of the Broward County Sheriffs Office. Its just explosive.


Copyright 2008 The New York Times Company
Privacy Policy Search Corrections RSS First Look Help Contact Us Work for Us Site Map
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
boppers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-04-11 03:53 PM
Response to Reply #25
59. "Drugs are illegal"? Uh no.
"anyone of age can drive to a store, buy liquor, get in their car, start drinking and kill a family ?"

Yes, because drugs *are* legal.

Alcohol is a drug.
So is Tobacco.
So is Aspirin.

Drugs are not illegal, as a whole.

Drugs are *regulated*, but not illegal.

*Unregulated* drugs are illegal.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
PavePusher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-04-11 10:54 AM
Response to Reply #11
28. Well, there are several improvements legalization would make.
1. You could regulate for purity and dosage, thus reducing chances of accidental O.D.'s, poisonings, etc.

2. It would lower prices and thus crime levels, as fewer desperate people would need to do fewer desperate things to obtain their next fix.

3. It would reduce/end the cartel and distribution chain violence

4. Fewer people fired from jobs or denied jobs due to social stigmatization.

5. If you can't accept evolution, you are denying reality. And that never leads to solutions.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
newspeak Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-04-11 11:10 AM
Response to Reply #11
34. how about all of the innocent people who have been killed
because of our war on drugs? "Oops, wrong house" "oh, I thought that was weed, oh my mistake sorry I killed you." I have a book full of stories about those who have been killed-from the elderly to kids.

So, we got to kill them to save them? I'd rather my money be spent on rehab centers. Worked with a guy who had a drug problem, the boss found out and they wanted to get him in rehab. He was ready, then and there for rehab. Called all over the place, waiting time six months. So, if you really cared about helping someone out, I'd say putting our money in medical facilities and rehab seems like the best plan, if you really care about them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-04-11 11:57 AM
Response to Reply #11
40. How in the world you think anything as corrupt and disruptive to nations and citizens as Drug War ..
is something that we should continue shocks me!

Is corruption of all of govenrment and elected officials worth your effort to

prevent people from smoking pot -- or using cocain or heroin?

And to deny this corruption would be even more shocking!

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
DeSwiss Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-04-11 09:58 PM
Response to Reply #40
86. +1000
:thumbsup:
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Webster Green Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-04-11 12:42 PM
Response to Reply #11
45. DEA are scum.
Many of them are corrupt, and engaged in the sort of thing the article describes. The ones who aren't, think they are saving the world by enforcing absurd laws that make criminals out of anyone who chooses to explore the effects of mind-altering substances. Those who are drawn to the drug enforcement occupation are control freaks, who need to mind their own beeswax, as does the government they work for.

Lagalization is all about harm reduction. The fact that these substances are illegal is the biggest problem with any of them. The actual effects of any of these illegal drugs are far less dangerous than the fact that they are sold on the black market, therefore demanding absurd prices, and create all the nefarious activities that go with that.

Most illegal substances are plant derived, and these plants have every right to exist and to be utilized by the more adventurous and curious sorts of folks like myself who have come to appreciate them.

The idiotic laws against drugs are directly responsible for all the violence and killing that we are seeing in Mexico (and elsewhere).
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Hutzpa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-04-11 03:45 PM
Response to Reply #11
57. There is nothing wrong with defending a DEA agent
the trouble as you've seen with Sergeant pepper spray is that the department are
awash with unscrupulous beings that soils the good work of others within the
administration.

The question I think that most of us should be asking is how do you eradicate
malignant infestation?

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
midnight Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-04-11 05:52 PM
Response to Reply #11
79. I feel the same way about the brave nurses in my family who
find themselves on the front lines of these drug wars. This war needs to be ended the same way prohibition was ended... and the DEA knows it too.



Prohibition (1920-1933 R.I.P.) was known as The Noble Experiment. The results of the experiment are clear: innocent people suffered; organized crime grew into an empire; the police, courts, and politicians became corrupt; disrespect for the law grew; and the per capita consumption of the prohibited substance alcohol increased dramatically, year by year, for the next thirteen years of this Noble Experiment, never to return to the pre-1920 levels.
You would think that an experiment with such clear results would not need to be repeated; but the experiment is being repeated; it's going on today. Only the prohibited substances have changed. The results remain the same. They are clearer now than they were then. Peter McWilliams, Ain't Nobody's Business If You Do, p.61.

But the current prohibition is not really an experiment it is U.S. government policy imposed upon all peoples of the world (by threat of sanctions against their countries) in order to keep the prices of illegal drugs sky-high, thereby ensuring huge profits for the drug lords both within and without the governments of the world (including the U.S. government).

When marijuana was popularized in the 20s and 30s in the American jazz scene, blacks and whites sat down together as equals and shared "joints". The racist anti-marijuana propaganda of the time used this crumbling of racial barriers as an example of the degredation caused by the devil's weed. Harry Anslinger, head of the newly formed narcotics division, warned the middle-class about blacks and whites dancing together in Teahouses, using blatant prejudice to sell prohibition. Reefer madness was born from the hysteria generated then. In the early 60s cannabis was once again popularized by poetic nonconformist beatniks. Pot helped to open the eyes of the youth and change the values of a whole generation of flower children that questioned the value of war and the sanity of global pollution. In response President Nixon declared a Drug War upon the flower children and the threatening tendencies toward peace and their ubiquitous sacramental incense, marijuana. Chris Bennett, Lynn Osburn & Judy Osburn, Marijuana in Magic & Religion

http://www.serendipity.li/wod.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
lib2DaBone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-04-11 06:26 PM
Response to Reply #11
81. No need to legaize heroin and Meth... but let's stop filling jails with non-violent Weed smokers.
Weed is not Heroin.. not even close. Weed should not be in the same class as heroin or meth or cocaine.

Let's not fill our jails with someone who smokes a MJ cigarette.. just to feed the profits of Corections Corporation of America.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
limpyhobbler Donating Member (184 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-04-11 11:53 PM
Response to Reply #81
89. Agreed. We shouldn't lump all drugs together. Marijuana and crack are not similar. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
lib2DaBone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-04-11 06:58 PM
Response to Reply #11
83. Brave.. courageous.honest...? That is stretching a lot.. not just a little...
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
saras Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-05-11 12:02 AM
Response to Reply #11
90. You and I have either met different DEA agents, or they percieve you and not me as one of "them"
Worse than anything I've seen on any OWS video, repeatedly and consistently.

They are the police organization in America that is the hands-down winner for breaking into the wrong house and shooting men, women, kids, dogs, cats, birds, fish, whatever they damn well feel like shooting, especially upper-class brown people.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
stockholmer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-05-11 12:26 AM
Response to Reply #11
91. sorry, all DEA are scum, they willingly are working in pursuit of a murderous, tyrannical policy
Legalizing drugs/ending the war on them is not about the right to use so much as it is about taking away the right to profit from a governmental practice that guarantees huge illegal profits for the cartels and the banks that launder their money. The system locks up over a million non violent users (many cases inside a fro-profit private prison), AND then the governmental/police/lawyer complex illegally profits from insanely high defense fees, onerous state/local/federal fines, and also asset forfeitures.

The war on drugs also is a huge reason and a huge excuse for you civil liberties being taken from you.

ANY copper working to further this is pure scum. No exceptions granted.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
krabigirl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-05-11 11:20 AM
Response to Reply #11
101. Lmao. This is rich.
Edited on Mon Dec-05-11 11:21 AM by krabigirl
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Dawson Leery Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-06-11 12:31 PM
Response to Reply #11
112. The DEA and ALL of it's agents are worthless scum. They are garbage and deserve treatment as such.
They have taken up work that continues a policy of violence. Prohibition never works.
There is nothing "brave" or "heroic" about arresting people for marijuana possession. The bankers have walked away with nominal damage, still common people are put into the for profit penal system for possession of mj and petty crimes.

At the same time, many agents are engaging in the same illegal activities in which they make arrests for. Hypocrites.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Dawson Leery Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-07-11 09:29 PM
Response to Reply #112
119. kick
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
limpyhobbler Donating Member (184 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-04-11 08:10 AM
Response to Reply #4
13. bingo
with that much drugs, guns and money sloshing around, there is bound to be corruption.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-04-11 06:13 AM
Response to Reply #3
6. Matthews referred to "modified limited hangout" last week, in a different context.
It has its own wiki

"A limited hangout, or partial hangout, is a public relations or propaganda technique that involves the release of previously hidden information in order to prevent a greater exposure of more important details. It takes the form of deception, misdirection, or coverup often associated with intelligence agencies involving a release or "mea culpa" type of confession of only part of a set of previously hidden sensitive information, that establishes credibility for the one releasing the information who by the very act of confession appears to be "coming clean" and acting with integrity; but in actuality, by withholding key facts, is protecting a deeper operation and those who could be exposed if the whole truth came out. In effect, if an array of offenses or misdeeds is suspected, this confession admits to a lesser offense while covering up the greater ones.


A limited hangout typically is a response to lower the pressure felt from inquisitive investigators pursuing clues that threaten to expose everything, and the disclosure is often combined with red herrings or propaganda elements that lead to false trails, distractions, or ideological disinformation; thus allowing covert or criminal elements to continue in their improper activities.

<snip>

"Modified limited hangout

In a March 22, 1973 meeting between Richard Nixon, John Dean, John Ehrlichman, John Mitchell, and H.R. Haldeman, Ehrlichman incorporated the term into a new and related one, "modified limited hangout."<2>
The phrase was coined in the following exchange<3>:

PRESIDENT: You think, you think we want to, want to go this route now? And the--let it hang out, so to speak?
DEAN: Well, it's, it isn't really that--
HALDEMAN: It's a limited hang out.
DEAN: It's a limited hang out.
EHRLICHMAN: It's a modified limited hang out.
PRESIDENT: Well, it's only the questions of the thing hanging out publicly or privately."

<snip?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Limited_hangout

IOW, it's a lie!
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Peace Patriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-04-11 10:33 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
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-04-11 10:53 PM
Response to Reply #26
88. Organized crime only exists at the pleasure and with the help of elites/corps who control our
government now --

Also thinking that the CIA got too busy with all its other criminal misdeeds around

the world - and maybe they also thought CIA had become a dirty word? -- but Drug War

business keeps expanding -- that's for sure!!

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Peace Patriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-05-11 10:18 AM
Response to Reply #88
95. There is evidence that the CIA was active against leftist governments in LatAm.
For instance, there was the CIA caper out of Miami. Miamian named "Guido" cons his way onto a Venezuelan state oil company plane with a suitcase containing $800,000 in U.S. cash and tries to walk it through customs in Buenos Aires, gets caught, flees back to Miami and becomes a state witness for a Bushbot U.S. attorney, claiming that the money was intended for leftist Cristina Fernandez, who was running for president of Argentina, from Hugo Chavez. The purpose, of course, was to smear both Chavez and Fernandez. She won the election easily, without the cash from "Hugo." And, as Venezuela's VP pointed out, if they'd wanted to give money to Fernandez, they would have taken it on Chavez's official jet, with diplomatic immunity, a day or so later, when Chavez visited Argentina.

It is, of course, nearly impossible to nail the CIA for ops like that. But they do have a certain smell.

Another CIA-like operation was the "miracle laptop" aimed at Chavez and Rafael Correa, leftist president of Ecuador, although that one had a Rumsfeldian ("Office of Special Plans") smell and there is good evidence of Rumsfeld's interest in the op. (Rumsfeld's OSP was his own private CIA for ops that he couldn't get the CIA to do.) (A laptop seized from a FARC guerilla camp just inside Ecuador's border with Colombia--which had been obliterated with 500 lb. U.S. "smart bombs"--allegedly contained "evidence" that Chavez and Correa were helping the FARC guerillas to obtain a "dirty bomb," were accepting money from, or giving money to, the FARC and other wild charges--all since totally discredited. Seems to have been an op connected to a Rumsfeld war plan against Venezuela and Ecuador to destabilize those governments and get control of all of that oil.)

In any case, however busy the CIA was torturing prisoners around the world and covering up the Bush Cartel money trail to Al Qaeda, the Bushwhacks had many U.S. government agencies to utilize in their war on the Left in Latin America. They were even using the Peace Corps. One young Peace Corps volunteer in Bolivia whistleblew that the U.S. embassy asked him to spy on the leftists in Bolivia. They were using the CIA, the OSP, the USAID-NED, the DEA, the FBI, the U.S. 'Justice' Dept. and all U.S. "war on drugs" entities including the Pentagon and its private 'contractors'--all mooshed together--in various dirty ops and black ops against democratically elected Leftist governments.

One of the most interesting and important things that has occurred, with the new movement of cooperation among Latin American governments (led by the Leftists, of course) is great improvement in LatAm countries' intelligence services. Like CIA ops, this is hard to nail down precisely, but I think that the LatAm intelligence agencies are developing and sharing information in ways that they have never done before. Known ops that got busted are several assassination plots (against Leftist presidents), meetings of rightwing coup groups from several countries coordinated by the Bush Junta, the U.S. embassy/DEA collusion with the white separatists in Bolivia, Uribe (Colombia/Bushwhack) infiltration of "Black Eagle" death squads into Venezuela, the secret U.S. (Bushwhack)/Colombia military agreement (subsequently ruled illegal by the Colombian supreme court; among other things--a huge expansion of U.S. military bases in Colombia--the agreement gave "total diplomatic immunity" to all U.S. military personnel and all U.S. military 'contractors' in Colombia), and more. And there is the plain fact that all of these Leftist presidents have survived--are still alive, are still in power--and not just in power, but actively working for Latin American integration and independence from the U.S.

The Bush Junta heavy boots approach to the vast and amazing Leftist democracy movement in Latin America failed. Every time they tried to squish some leader, with various dirty ops, they were foiled and the movement got stronger (more Leftist presidents elected). All this effort--using multi-billions of U.S. tax dollars for the "war on drugs"--was for naught. There are even many centrist and rightwing LatAm leaders, now, who oppose the U.S. "war on drugs, including--quite incredibly--the new president of Colombia.

One of my worries about the U.S. and LatAm is that Leon Panetta, though he is clearly some kind of Bush Cartel operative (closely allied with Bush Sr; member of Bush Sr.'s "Iraq Study Group," which probably ousted Rumsfeld and stopped the nuking of Iran), is a much smoother operator than anyone in Bush Jr.'s Junta. There is evidence that Panetta was involved both in ousting Uribe in Colombia and covering up Bush Jr.'s criminal trail there (his first visible action as CIA Director was to go to Bogota), and in vetting and approving a different, and more subtle, use of the U.S. foothold in Colombia--with the new president Manuel Santos, whose first action as president, for instance, was to make peace with Venezuela. (He has also made other Leftist noises--for instance, promising universal health care in Colombia by next year, and the above, stating publicly that drugs should probably be decriminalized.)

I am, of course, not against peace--but what I suspect is that "war" just wasn't working in LatAm--it was backfiring. U.S. war profiteers were getting booted (from Ecuador, from Venezuela, from Bolivia) and U.S. transglobal corporations and banksters were getting booted or forced onto a "level playing field" (i.e., competition, no U.S.-arranged monopoly). The alliance between Chavez in Venezuela and the Leftist president of Brazil, Lula da Silva--a critically important alliance for LatAm solidarity--was holding. And his successor--the amazing Dilma Rousseff (who was tortured, in her youth, by the U.S.-backed fascist regime and is now president of Brazil) appears to be even tougher on LatAm solidarity than Lula (who did some amazing things on this issue). Ergo, a new approach is needed in order to serve U.S. Corporate Ruler interests--more skill at "dividing and conquering," better hidden ops, more emphasis on long term economic warfare, better thought out strategies, etc.

One of my biggest worries about this new Washington approach is that it is merely better war prep. For instance, Bill Clinton's ruinous sanctions against Iraq prepped Iraq for the Bush Junta war. The Obama administration placed some weird "sanctions" on Venezuela, recently. Very odd thing. Could have been merely to help Exxon Mobil, which has been trying for some time to seize Venezuelan assets abroad. But you gotta worry about "sanctions" on a completely innocent and democratic country.

Also, Obama can easily--EASILY!--be replaced. A far rightwing-connected e-voting corporation--ES&S, which bought out Diebold--now controls 80% of the voting systems in the U.S. They have undetectable power to (s)elect anyone they wish, for just about any office, including president. Obama hasn't done much to offend the far right but if they do replace him with Bush Junta II, an oil war in South America may be one result. This may also depend on whether Chavez regains his health. He has cancer and does not look well. If he does get better and wins the election next year, this may influence behind-the-scenes decisions here. Venezuela has the biggest oil reserves on earth--twice Saudi Arabia's, according to the USGS--sitting right along the southern rim of the Pentagon's "circle the wagons" area of Central America/the Caribbean. How to regain control of that oil and how to fracture and defeat the strong, widespread Leftist democracy movement that Chavez and the people of Venezuela pioneered has been Problemo No. One for U.S. policy in LatAm for over a decade. Are Obama and Panetta sincere in wanting peaceful trade on Latin American terms, or are they laying better groundwork for the Pentagon's 'Southern Command' war plan?

Some pundits have said that the Bush Junta "neglected" Latin America. Some have even blamed them for "losing" LatAm (our Corporate Rulers' "back yard")--although the blame is now being shifted to Obama (as with blame for everything else). But I don't believe that this is true. It's just that, in a democratic region such as Latin America--indeed, a region on fire with a passion for democracy--thuggism is much less effective. The Bush Junta did all sorts of anti-democracy operations in LatAm and spent billions on it. (One of their ops was helping to rig the last presidential election in Mexico--an op that was all about privatizing Mexico's oil, and, when the privatization scheme failed, they then inflicted Mexico with the vast murder and mayhem of the U.S. "war on drugs.") They were putting Pentagon assets in place for a war (including their reconstitution of the U.S. 4th Fleet--mothballed since WW II--in the Caribbean, their illegal military agreement to vastly expand the Pentagon's presence in Colombia and more.) They were not neglecting Latin America. Their methods simply failed in the face of an historic and real democracy movement. (Their horrible "war on drugs" in Mexico has prompted a commission of former presidents of Mexico to call for the legalization of marijuana and re-thinking the entire "war on drugs"--so, even where they have appeared to "succeed," they have failed). Also, I think they had a divided purpose involving Bush Cartel interests in the trillion+ dollar cocaine revenue stream.

Here is my sad and appalling conclusion: The more democratic that Latin America becomes, the more likely it is that U.S. transglobal corporations, banksters and war profiteers will become desperate to regain control of those resources and economies--desperate enough to inflict Latin America with an oil war. And with all these mooshed together U.S. fascist entities--the U.S. "security" state writ large and running rampant around the world, and with Panetta now at the Pentagon further healing the internal war (basically Rumsfeld's Pentagon vs the CIA), their efficiency at instigating war will likely improve. (Look what they did in Libya!)
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-05-11 10:25 AM
Response to Reply #95
96. What CIA was doing around the world, they also did in USA ... which is why we are so damaged -- !!
Certainly they played a major role in coup on JFK which took not only our president

but our people's government --

CIA is a filthy word all over the world -- rightly so!!


:hi: -- Keep on tellin' it -- !!



And just want to add that the CIA created tremendous damage in Latin America -- as they

did everywhere in the world -- though amazingly liberal governments have risen again thanks

to the strength of the people!

And, needless to say, the US/CIA is still trying to undo it all!!


Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Hotler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-05-11 08:02 AM
Response to Reply #26
92. Wow! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
russspeakeasy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-04-11 04:28 PM
Response to Reply #3
62. at least.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-04-11 06:15 AM
Response to Original message
7. We must create evil in order to fight evil, except we don't really fight evil all that much, either.
Your tax dollars at work, Mr. and Mrs. America.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
DebJ Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-04-11 08:00 AM
Response to Original message
9. But these tactics do end up catching some really big dealers,
like the one a few years back in the Caribbean who had his own island, his own navy, his own army. 17 countries worked together to bring him down. That stopped massive amounts of drugs. The DEA does have some great successes. Unfortunately, due to the need for secrecy, we don't hear much of it.

Having seen drug abuse destroy several people in my and my husband's family, I heartily support what the DEA does.
So many people on MSNBC's website keep commenting just legalize pot and all will be solved. Pot only destroyed
one family that I know...wiped out a thriving business, and tore the family apart while the user (and business owner) did little but sit around in a daze. The meth and cocaine and heroin addicts are living lives of hell and taking the families
down with them, not to mention the victims of their crimes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Ezlivin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-04-11 09:58 AM
Response to Reply #9
19. So what?
The problem is with our approach to the problem of drug use.

Instead of acting as we need to "war" on addicts, we should treat it as a health problem. Which it is.

If someone under the influence of a drug commits a crime, the crime is not the drug use, but the illegal act committed.

The DEA is a part of the problem. (See: Prohibition)

Disband the DEA, legalize, tax and regulate ALL drugs.

If you and your husband's family had access to treatment instead of incarceration, society would be better off.

Trying to prevent everyone from using drugs is, at best, a Sisyphean task. Drug use has and always will be with us. Our decision is in how to properly deal with it as a society and culture. Our current War on Drugs is an absolute failure, irregardless of how many drug king pins are captured.

If you have the opportunity, please read the following:

"Why Our Drug Laws Have FAILED and What We Can Do About It" - A Judicial Indictment of the War on Drugs - Judge James P. Gray
"Drug War Heresies" - Learning from Other Vices, Times, & Places - Robert J. MacCoun and Peter Reuter
"Drugging America" - A Trojan Horse - Rodney Stich
"Smoke and Mirrors" - The War on Drugs and The Politics of Failure - Dan Baum
"Drug Warriors & Their Prey" - From Police Power to Police State - Richard Lawrence Miller
"Ain't Nobody's Business if You Do" - The Absurdity of Consensual Crimes in Our Free Country - Peter McWilliams
"The Pursuit of Oblivion" - A Global History of Narcotics - Richard Davenport-Hines

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
DebJ Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-04-11 10:13 AM
Response to Reply #19
21. So how do you regulate a user of cocaine, for example, one
who is a parent? The children watch them doing their 'legal' activity. You think this is okay?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
PavePusher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-04-11 10:57 AM
Response to Reply #21
30. Do kids see their parents drink alcohol?
Oh, teh horrereurs!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
JackRiddler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-04-11 01:48 PM
Response to Reply #21
49. This is an argument for the prohibition of alcohol and cigarettes and who knows what else.
Please acknowledge that, and tell us if you will be consistent in your thinking and demand alcohol etc. be made illegal.

Furthermore:

The world sucks. Lots of children have rotten parents, and most of them aren't rotten because they use drugs. Many of us grew up with rotten parents. Astonishingly, most of us who did, still love their parents and are grateful the state didn't intervene. In most cases, having child services snatch the child away from the rotten parents will only make things worse for the child.

You "regulate" the cocaine user when they behave in a way that attracts justified interest from the authorities.

Or do you think it would be better if the government had preemptive surveillance measures for every house, to make sure no parents are doing cocaine, and to seize the children preemptively soon as it appears to be so?

Anyway, what you're saying bullshit. The state is not currently using the fact that cocaine is illegal to save any children. That's not the reason cocaine is illegal, and making it illegal has fucked up many more children than it has helped. (In other words: show me empirical evidence for your outlandish implied claim that prohibition is good for children, or give up on it.)
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
krabigirl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-05-11 11:18 AM
Response to Reply #21
99. Help them, don't throw them in jail.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
DebJ Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-04-11 10:15 AM
Response to Reply #19
22. I want to see the big dope dealers rotting in jail cells. I
heartily applaud everytime I hear of one, and I think about three young people who are rotting away from drug use. They aren't even really people anymore. It is so tragic. While some son-of-a-b gets rich. The children of heavy drug users suffer so incredibly. So do the siblings, parents, etc. It is NOT okay.

No way I could ever say use of cocaine, heroine, and meth are okay.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
theaocp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-04-11 11:12 AM
Response to Reply #22
35. What you're talking about
can be done under a system of regulation, as well. I assume you'd like to send the execs of Anheuser-Busch and Philip-Morris "rotting in jail cells" too, yes? If not, what's the difference? A system that grandfathers in one set of highly-dangerous substances for recreational use and bans others is doomed to failure. Either call for the prohibition of the two substances that cause the most misery in society or get off your high horse.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-05-11 10:28 AM
Response to Reply #22
97. Presume you know that would be top government officials -- ???
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
DebJ Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-04-11 10:16 AM
Response to Reply #19
23. "Ain't nobody's Business if you do" yes it is because it rots
families and society. Making it legal won't fix that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Peace Patriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-04-11 12:01 PM
Response to Reply #23
41. DebJ, I hear you. And I agree to this extent: We should be helping families and children
who are being decimated by drug addiction. For instance, we should have community facilities where such families can live--if they can possibly be kept together--and get rehab, medical care, counseling, retraining, enter jobs programs, etc., and benefit from a close support network--a small community with outside help available, trying to kick drugs. Children should be protected from abuse and have alternative adults around to get the support they need to deal with addicted parents or other family members. The FAMILY needs to be supported by society rather than society stigmatizing addicts and throwing them into our horrible 'justice' system, which itself breaks up families and destroys lives.

Some parents may be too far gone for rehab--whether physically or mentally. A community living situation would include provision for this--for instance, removing children from their parents' care--perhaps having a nearby care center that the children can be moved to, temporarily or permanently (as arrangements are made for other family caregivers or community members to take over)--hopefully in a gradual transition (not abrupt loss of contact with a parent) that is psychologically and emotionally sound.

But how many parents would LOVE to have help--child care, medical care, transition jobs, etc.--while they detox their lives? We can't know for sure. But what we DO know is that criminalization doesn't work. And people who get addicted, and most people who end up dealing, are desperate. They are poor. They see no other options. They get trapped in a horrible cycle of illegality that they see no way out of. And as long as that cycle is hugely profitable to other sectors of society (to big drug lords and networks, to rich "war on drugs" and prison 'contractors' and to corporate forces that benefit from a downtrodden working class), there will be no way out for them.

The drug lords are ALWAYS replaced by OTHER drug lords. One may be "gotten." Ten spring up to take over the business. Why is this? We've been waging the "war on drugs" for fifty frigging years! And the drug trade and addiction levels have hardly budged. 50 years! Time to call it what it is: a FAILED program--and do something better, something more worthy of our democratic and progressive traditions. Our forebears recognized the WRONGNESS of Prohibition (outlawing liquor) far more quickly than we have recognized the wrongness of outlawing certain drugs. They reversed that policy within a decade. We've been stuck in this horrifying, self-defeating loop for half a century. Time we got out of it. Really.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
newspeak Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-05-11 12:29 PM
Response to Reply #41
105. What deb said reminds me of a statement by michael moore
that corporations have done more damage to families than drugs-by shutting down and laying off, they've brought cities to their knees-they've drove families to poverty-also, to drink and drugs. You're worried about the damage of drugs, well, big pharma has no problem pushing drugs. When I worked at DMV, I noted quite a few people on anti-depressives (if they needed it or not). People imbibe, take drugs to have a good time, but also to alter their grim reality.

You don't need drugs to be an abusive, arsehole.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Ezlivin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-05-11 04:45 PM
Response to Reply #23
107. Do you like and enjoy freedom?
You seem to support the idea of eroding personal freedom.

Freedom is just that: The freedom to do something. If you take an opportunity and read McWilliam's book, you'll see that we've lost the whole notion of what freedom truly means.

If I'm truly free to pursue happiness, then why can't that happiness involve inhaling smoke from a burning plant or ingesting a peyote button? If, in the pursuit of my happiness I harm no one, why should you intervene? Why should a so-called free society intervene?

I have no problem with bass fishing. But some men do. Some men ruin their relationships over their bass fishing. Should we then ban all bass fishing because of the problems some people have?

Let's get back to expanding and enlarging our freedoms instead of restricting them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-04-11 02:13 PM
Response to Reply #9
52. If the DEA were effective, how does drug abuse destroy so many people?
And I don't believe pot destroyed a family. Perhaps another problem, or multiple problems, destroyed that family.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
krabigirl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-05-11 11:19 AM
Response to Reply #9
100. Wow..
So because cannabis "destroyed" one family, then everyone else who uses it reponsibly should be subject to dea abuses? Really?

Also, the worst kinds of abuses are often justified by authoritarians and their followers, all to "save the children."
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
NashVegas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-05-11 12:10 PM
Response to Reply #9
104. Goodness, We Sure Are Selective About It, Aren't We?
Hint: the ones we arrest are the ones who we no longer have use for.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
CanonRay Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-04-11 08:04 AM
Response to Original message
10. They're running guns and laundering money.
What, exactly, makes them different from the criminals?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Le Taz Hot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-04-11 08:10 AM
Response to Original message
12. Is anyone else connecting the dots here?
The DEA laundering monies for the cartels, taking YEARS to make arrests (if ineed they ever are made), and selling arms to those same cartels. MEANWHILE the Obama Administration continues to crack down on legal dispensaries, forcing cusomters to buy from -- the cartels.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-04-11 02:22 PM
Response to Reply #12
53. Legal dispensaries are not exactly big crime, either, are they?
Just very easy marks for the D of J;


Very easy to find, if legal medicinal dispenser. Lots easier than the illegal pusher.

Lord, everything seems backwards anymore. I think we may have gone through the looking glass while no one was looking.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Hotler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-04-11 08:25 AM
Response to Original message
14. The New York Times left out the part about....
which banks and companies are being used by the D.E.A. to launder the money. Goldman-Sachs, JP Morgan, MF Global perhaps????
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Rosa Luxemburg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-04-11 09:27 AM
Response to Reply #14
17. of course
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
dixiegrrrrl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-04-11 09:41 AM
Response to Reply #14
18. "which banks and companies are being used by the D.E.A. to launder the money?"
1....Manhattan District Attorney Robert Morgenthau, together with federal and New York state banking officials, is on the verge of settling serious money laundering charges against the Bank of America Corp. with a reported $25 million fine, making this the second largest money laundering case the long-time DA has settled in three months.
In December, the Manhattan DA, the New York State Banking Department, and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. settled a similar case with Israel Discount Bank of New York, also for a fine totaling $25 million, including the costs of the investigation.
http://www.netbanker.com/2006/02/manhattan-district-att...
Note the date is 2006.

2.Banks Financing Mexico Gangs Admitted in Wells Fargo Deal
" snip.....The smugglers had bought the DC-9 with laundered funds they transferred through two of the biggest banks in the U.S.: Wachovia Corp. and Bank of America Corp., Bloomberg Markets magazine reports in its August 2010 issue.
This was no isolated incident. Wachovia, it turns out, had made a habit of helping move money for Mexican drug smugglers. Wells Fargo & Co., which bought Wachovia in 2008, has admitted in court that its unit failed to monitor and report suspected money laundering by narcotics traffickers -- including the cash used to buy four planes that shipped a total of 22 tons of cocaine.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-06-29/banks-financin...
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Selena Harris Donating Member (273 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-04-11 10:10 AM
Response to Reply #18
20. AND the BIGGESTbanking cartel of them all is...
the Federal Reserve...which btw isn't federal,and there is nothing left in reserve!

Read the Creature from Jekyll Island and weep,folks.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Hotler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-04-11 04:42 PM
Response to Reply #20
65. I was wonder that. CIA running the drugs. Federal Reserve laundering it. eom.
Or the Fereral Reserve is so broke that they have to sell drugs to keep the banks afloat. :tinfoilhat: How does my hat look?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Gregorian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-04-11 09:45 PM
Response to Reply #20
85. Thanks. That lead me to some interesting information.
The Federal Reserve System although it parades around looking as though it's a government operation of some kind, is merely a cartel of banks right under our noses and it is protected by law.

AND

Cartels often go into partnership with governments because they need the force of law to enforce their cartel agreement but in this case they did it in spades.


You helped me learn about the fed like I never would have.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-05-11 10:29 AM
Response to Reply #20
98. K/R
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
JackRiddler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-04-11 11:42 AM
Response to Reply #18
39. Excellent point. And only scratching the surface.
Recall:

In your face: Citigroup bought Mexican bank Banamex in 1998 or so, just as it was exposed for huge drug money laundering activity. Hey, that makes a solid asset, right?


Circumstantial: Richard Grasso's trip to the FARC around the same time.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Rosa Luxemburg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-04-11 12:58 PM
Response to Reply #39
46. but are the CEOs of these banks nervous?
of course not.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Selena Harris Donating Member (273 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-04-11 03:24 PM
Response to Reply #39
55. Viktor Bout was charged with money laundering...
about a decade or so ago,by Belguim if I am not mistaken.

I wonder which bank he was using then(and before) when flying for Brown and Root,etc,into Iraq?

The Google search for this site shows MANY exceptional threads on Bout,money laundering and the BCCI,Nugan Hand Bank ,and Jeb Bush Florida cartel connections.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Hotler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-04-11 04:46 PM
Response to Reply #55
66. Shit! I forgot about the BCCI. They know how to run drugs
and launder money.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
deconstruct911 Donating Member (809 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-04-11 04:22 PM
Response to Reply #39
61. That was really deep too...
Edited on Sun Dec-04-11 04:35 PM by deconstruct911
Operation Casablanca...
http://www.narconews.com/casablanca1.html

"What Banks and Bankers Were Busted in Operation Casablanca?
From the June/July 1998 issue of Money Laundering Alert
Bank/ Bank funds sought to be forfeited"

Banamex**/. $3,318,868.43
Banca Serfin*/ 9,582,523.14
Banco Confia*/ 12,187,224.13
Banco Industrial de Venezuela**/4. 4,007,891.28
Bancomer*/16,287,086.72
Bancopromex**/2,028,706.10
Banco Santander**/897,797.00
Banoro**/ 1,101,761.00
Banorte**/ 7,323,103.51
Banpais**/ 2,682,004.19
Bilbao Vizcaya**/236,820.00
Bital**/ 3,901,798.96
CBI Casa de Bolsa**/1,000,000.00
Caribbean America Bank**/4,260,385.57


(CBS) A former U.S. Customs agent tells Ed Bradley that when he tried to determine the validity of evidence he says could implicate Mexico's secretary of defense in drug money laundering, his superiors stopped his investigation to avoid an international incident. The ex-agent, William Gately, appears in his first television interview on 60 Minutes on Sunday, April 16.

According to Gately, if the allegations could be proven, U.S. Customs may have been able to catch one of the really big fish in Mexico's drug trade. But it never followed up on a covert video showing a corrupt Mexican banker alleging that Mexico's secretary of defense wanted to launder $1 billion in drug money.

That chance came during "Operation Casablanca," U.S. law enforcement's largest investigation into drug money laundering, a sting executed without the knowledge of the Mexican government that eventually landed dozens of Mexican bankers in jail. (Just not the big fish I guess)
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2000/04/13/60minutes/mai...

Citi was involved with Mexcian drug money before also.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ra%C3%BAl_Salinas_de_Gorta...
Alleged money laundering

In November, 1995, Ral Salinas's wife, Paulina Castaon and his brother-in-law, Antonio Castaon were arrested in Geneva, Switzerland after attempting to withdraw $84 million USD from an account owned by Ral under an alias. Their capture led to the unveiling of a vast fortune spread around the world and summing to hundreds of millions of dollars, even though he never officially received an annual income of more than $190,000. A report by the U.S. General Accounting Office indicated that Raul Salinas transferred over $90 million out of Mexico and into private bank accounts in London and Switzerland, through a complex set of transactions between 1992 and 1994, all with the help of Citibank and its affiliates.<2>

The brother Carlos Salinas de Gortari was involved with NAFTA when he was president.
NAFTA=drug trade:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vK2EuYgFCr8
(skip to around 5 mins,and watch out for all the Brian Ross disinfo)


One of the longest serving directors was John Deutch which MCR exposed:
http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ciadrugs/052401_s...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4t3pl5Wxgyg

I think this old post by Debug explains why Citibank is such a big player.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

I got a few hits on clearstream/citibank searches. Citibank apparently launders a lot through clearstream.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Selena Harris Donating Member (273 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-04-11 04:41 PM
Response to Reply #61
64. Let's not forget "Sir Allen Stanford" of Houston,Texas
and HIS ties to the entire Florida banking community.

He was setting up his own Caribbean banking cartel when he was arrested at the home of his longtime girlfriend in DC a few years back..

Amazing how little has been printed about him of late.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Hotler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-04-11 04:48 PM
Response to Reply #64
67. I think he got his ass kick in prison awhile back. eom.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Selena Harris Donating Member (273 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-04-11 04:57 PM
Response to Reply #67
70. Here's a few TOP links for Stanford and Bush entrerprises and a "Sir"prize,too!
Edited on Sun Dec-04-11 04:58 PM by Selena Harris
Florida banking agency helped Stanford set up unregulated office ...Yesterday, we got new details on Allen Stanford's alleged $8 .... On Eyeonmiami,
I've written a lot about 1998, the year Jeb Bush was ...
www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az...... - Similar

Exclusive: Romney Family Partnered With Brokers Who Allegedly ...Allen Stanford's name comes up only in passing, with the TP reporter .... That Mitt
Romney, enthusiastically praised by Jeb Bush, thinks he ...
www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az...... - Similar

So, Mitt Romney has extensive ties with 3 former Allen Stanford ...Nov 1, 2011 ... So, Mitt Romney has extensive ties with 3 former Allen Stanford Ponzi players?
... That Mitt Romney, enthusiastically praised by Jeb Bush, ...
journals.democraticunderground.com/seafan/5093 - Similar


seafan's Journal - ArchivesJeb Bush. Phillips, a former journalist with CNN and ABC News, is the founder of
..... The Bush II regime allowed Allen Stanford to set up shop in 2001. ...
journals.democraticunderground.com/?az=archives&j=1174... - Similar


seafan's Journal - ArchivesSo, Mitt Romney has extensive ties with 3 former Allen Stanford Ponzi players?
... That Mitt Romney, enthusiastically praised by Jeb Bush, thinks he should ...
journals.democraticunderground.com/?az=archives&j=1174... - Similar


Ave Maria, Florida, spawned six similar governments in state ...Jeb Bush all approved the law creating Ave Maria's government. ...... Caribbean
money laundering banks, the mob (again), Russian oligarchs, Alan Stanford ...
www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az...... - Similar
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Selena Harris Donating Member (273 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-04-11 05:16 PM
Response to Reply #39
73. Remember Operation Gladio and "suicided" banker Roberto Calvi...
Edited on Sun Dec-04-11 05:18 PM by Selena Harris
the Vatican Bank alleged money laundering scandal a couple of decades ago??

(Lots of Roman Catholics in South America ,ftr.)


Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
deconstruct911 Donating Member (809 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-04-11 05:22 PM
Response to Reply #73
74. I think that was even connected to Clearstream.....
Edited on Sun Dec-04-11 05:25 PM by deconstruct911
Clearstream:

:Accusations

In 2001, investigative reporter Denis Robert and Ernest Backes, an executive at Cedel until May 1983, published a book, Revelation$<6> in which they alleged that Clearstream played a major part in the underground economy, was a main platform for money laundering for hundreds of banks, and "operated hundreds of confidential accounts for banks so they could move money undetected," according to Business Week.<7>

Backes and Le Figaro were sued by Clearstream and found guilty of libel on March 29, 2004. Denis Robert was sued for libel and found guilty three on three counts on appeal on 16 October 2008 for the books Revelation$ and Black Box, as well as the documentary "Les Dissimulateurs" (The Deceivers). However, in February 2011, in a final judgment, the Court of Cassation overturned all convictions, ruling that his work was protected by freedom of speech and of the press.<8>

After an investigation in Luxembourg, which was closed in November 2004 after no evidence had been found of wrongdoing (Luxembourg prosecutor's office, Nov. 30, 2004), on suspicion of money laundering, tax evasion, and other fraud, Clearstream's CEO, Andr Lussi, resigned (See below). This enabled Deutsche Brse to purchase the remaining 50% of Clearstream International in July 2002. According to some, such as Business Week, Lussi had opposed such a takeover.

Clearstream is audited by KPMG, one of the largest global accounting firms. KPMG declared that it found "no evidence" to support the allegations made by Denis Robert and Ernest Backes, although its report was not made public."

...

"Banco Ambrosiano scandal

Further information: Banco Ambrosiano

By 1980, Ernest Backes had become Cedel's #3, in charge of relations with clients, but he was fired in May 1983, allegedly because he "knew too much about the Ambrosiano scandal," one of Italy's major political scandals. Two months after his dismissal, Grard Soisson was found dead in Corsica. The Banco Ambrosiano, allegedly involved in money-laundering for the Mafia and owned in majority by the Vatican Bank, collapsed in 1982. The bank "laundered drugs- and arms-trafficking money for the Italian and American Mafias, and in the 1980s it channeled Vatican money to the Contras in Nicaragua and to Solidarity in Poland", according to Komisar.

In 2005, the Italian justice system reopened its investigation of the murder of Roberto Calvi, Ambrosiano's chairman; it has requested the support of Ernest Backes, and will investigate Gerard Soisson's death, according to Komisar. Licio Gelli, headmaster of Propaganda Due masonic lodge (aka P2, it was involved in Gladio's "strategy of tension" starting from the 1969 Piazza Fontana bombing), and mafiosi Giuseppe Calo, are being prosecuted for the assassination of Roberto Calvi. Ernest Backes explained: "When Soisson died, the Ambrosiano affair wasn't yet known as a scandal. (After it was revealed) I realized that Soisson and I had been at the crossroads. We moved all those transactions known later in the scandal to Lima and other branches. Nobody even knew there was a Banco Ambrosiano branch in Lima and other South American countries."<10>"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clearstream


ETA Cedel is Cleartsream.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Selena Harris Donating Member (273 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-04-11 06:19 PM
Response to Reply #74
80. Veddy interesting that so many on SCOTUS are now Opus Dei


or,so they say.

BTW, Erik Prince of Blackwater is a Catholic member of Knights of Malta...and he recently moved to Saudi Arabia,which is a Wahabi Muslim country...but with NO extradition treaty with US.(Halliburton moved their offices there,earlier,FTR.)


The Vatican and the Intelligence Community, page
www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread410110/pg1

1 post - Last post: Sep 11, 2008
Reinhard Gehlen: Nazi spymaster, Knight of Malta. Worked in Operation Paperclip and Operation Gladio. Member of Le Cercle. Operated the ...

9-11: The Jesuit Connection, page 1‎ - Dec 26, 2008
A Secret Cabal in the CIA, page 2‎ - Nov 29, 2008
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
deconstruct911 Donating Member (809 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-12-11 02:18 AM
Response to Reply #39
120. More in your face
" Banamex owner Roberto Hernandez owns land near Cancun, Mexico that is commonly referred to as "the cocaine peninsula." President Bill Clinton vacationed on the Hernandez property in the summer of 2000."

http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ciadrugs/052401_s...
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Hotler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-12-11 07:29 AM
Response to Reply #120
121. More stuff that makes you go hmmmmm! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
deconstruct911 Donating Member (809 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-04-11 04:58 PM
Response to Reply #18
71. The irony...
Morgenthau investigated BCCI also. Bank of America helped set up BCCI if I remember correctly.

Shocking vid!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ak9ug_9yD7g


Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Hotler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-04-11 05:15 PM
Response to Reply #71
72. That is awesome. Thank you. eom.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Selena Harris Donating Member (273 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-04-11 03:50 PM
Response to Reply #14
58. New York Times Mexican Connection
Carlos Slim, one of the world's waelthist people,who is also a Mexican citizen. is a major stockholder in NYT.

Quite a history with Slim and NYT within the past decade.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Octafish Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-04-11 04:36 PM
Response to Reply #14
63. Catherine Austin Fitts names names.
The member banks of the New York Fed, Harvard big wigs, and a lot Who's Who are parts of The Tapeworm



The Ultimate Cold Call of 1999, during which Mr. Richard Grasso, then-Chairman of the New York Stock Exchange, hugs Col. Raul Reyes, now-deceased Vice Commander of FARC, the Colombian revolutionary drug runners.

"The Latin American drug cartels have stretched their tentacles much deeper into our lives than most people believe. It's possible they are calling the shots at all levels of government." - William Colby, former CIA Director, 1995
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Hotler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-04-11 04:55 PM
Response to Reply #63
69. +1 n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-04-11 09:12 AM
Response to Original message
15. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
newspeak Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-04-11 10:36 AM
Response to Reply #15
27. I remember poppy bush
I remember iran-contra-drugs for guns and those drugs wound up on our streets. Tell me? What interest did that little deal serve? Not the american peoples' interest.

Remember Noreiga was taken down by the us because of drug money laundering. Of course, I believe he said he was working with our government.

I think we may have some shady people that work within our government, and I don't believe it is a good thing for the majority of americans. Remember in vietnam and the golden triangle? The drugs smuggled into our country by desecrating soldiers' bodies? Remember the AF woman soldier who worked in finance in afghanistan who thought something was not kosher? Found shot to death after joking with her family that if she's found dead, don't believe I was suicided? Was there government theft or was there dealing in opium?

There are people on this board that can't believe that over a deal with the scummiest death dealers (squads), that a faction of our government would put drugs on the street, and then those who buy the drugs wind up in those for profit prisons. But, it was exposed during the iran-contra, bcci (more money laundering?) scandal. Real investigative journalists lost their lives attempting to expose the truth. And, basically nothing was done about the corruption, which allowed some of the players in the government again under little boots. And, that is what happened to our country. By not judicially holding those accountable, we go down that slippery slope of corruption-looking forward without taking care of the past, just allows corruption to become the norm instead of the anomaly.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Rosa Luxemburg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-04-11 09:25 AM
Response to Original message
16. Sounds like the Reagan era
I hope that this government is on our side and not on the side of the drug lords.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
russspeakeasy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-04-11 10:56 AM
Response to Reply #16
29. I don't remember having a really good feeling about the U.S.
government since the rabid Nixon admin was granted immunity by Ford..
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-04-11 10:26 AM
Response to Original message
24. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
newspeak Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-04-11 11:04 AM
Response to Reply #24
32. I think you need to go further back
And, how about the bush familys' friendly connections with the bin ladens and the house of saud. Got anything to say about that? Or Poppy's role in the iran-contra BCCI scandal? Or the death squads in central america?

What really smells rotten to me, is that the president of mexico's win was questionable, and some of the people in mexico know it. And, it seems since his win, that the drug cartels have been more violent. And because of the increased violence, the mexican government has cracked down on the people with the excuse of protecting them. Maybe I just have a suspicious mind, but it seems that the violence has increased under this president.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
wildbilln864 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-04-11 11:02 AM
Response to Original message
31. Daniel Hopsicker's MadCowProd.com ...nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Hotler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-04-11 04:52 PM
Response to Reply #31
68. +1 n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
theaocp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-04-11 11:07 AM
Response to Original message
33. How many times must I say it?
Narcs are NEVER to be trusted. EVER. They are all either complicit in forging misery in our society or so fucking ignorant, I'm amazed they can tie their shoes. Ultimately, anyone who supports a narc or their entrenched procedures of terrorism on the populace MUST support banning tobacco and alcohol as the dangerous, Schedule 1 substances that they are, or shut. the. fuck. up. People's lives are at stake and moralizing crusader-like bullshit is only harming more and more. STOP IT and stop defending narcs. They are a cancer.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Initech Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-04-11 11:31 AM
Response to Original message
38. The war on drugs needs to end NOW!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
valerief Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-04-11 12:18 PM
Response to Original message
43. Ha! "Fight" against drug cartels. Yeah, the US fights against drug cartels
the way they fight against poppy production in Afghanistan.

Sheesh. What a joke.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Raksha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-04-11 12:24 PM
Response to Original message
44. K & R - bookmarking
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
FreeBillClinton Donating Member (222 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-04-11 03:13 PM
Response to Original message
54. The DEA is essentially a criminal organization, worse than the mafia.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
mrarundale Donating Member (281 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-04-11 04:18 PM
Response to Original message
60.  and does anyone really think the "drug cartels' built those tunnels
without "official" cooperation?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
DeSwiss Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-04-11 05:29 PM
Response to Original message
75. K&R n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-04-11 05:32 PM
Response to Original message
76. Shocking.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
NICO9000 Donating Member (574 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-04-11 05:41 PM
Response to Original message
77. I wish I could say I'm shocked by this...
...but I've been around too long and seen too much for this to be anything but standard operating procedure for these thugs.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
hourglass1 Donating Member (105 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-04-11 05:51 PM
Response to Original message
78. PSSST !
the u. s. a. has always been a criminal organization ... always ... only obviously out of control since the end of wwii to the rest of the world
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
lib2DaBone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-04-11 06:46 PM
Response to Original message
82. Let me ask a simple question... What if.....
If a DEA Agent snorts Cocaine while "Undercover".. is this part of his job?

If a DEA Agent picks up a few thousand dollars and stuffs it in his pocket... without reporting it.. is this part of his/her "Job"?

How often do you think that this scenario happens as the DEA is is expanding it's forces all over the globe? The DEA has their own Seal-Type SWAT unit, APC's, Rocket launchers, missiles and bombs.

Is this really all about the War On Drugs?

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
lib2DaBone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-04-11 07:01 PM
Response to Original message
84. Didn't Reagan (Iran Contra) prove that DEA trades drugs for guns?
Edited on Sun Dec-04-11 07:02 PM by lib2DaBone
Haven't we been down this road many times?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Hotler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-05-11 08:42 AM
Response to Reply #84
94. Kicking cause this is a good read. eom.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
bertman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-04-11 09:59 PM
Response to Original message
87. K & R. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
DreamSmoker Donating Member (442 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-05-11 12:04 PM
Response to Original message
102. This Federal Government is self serving and out of Control
Edited on Mon Dec-05-11 12:05 PM by DreamSmoker
Our Government is running illegal Guns and now Cash?
So between this Government doing nothing and no accountability for losing Billions of tax payers Dollars to the Banks with absolutely impunity..
Guns secretly shipped over the Mexican Border into Cartel hands..
And Now Cash too...
All this while the Feds invade States to enforce U.S. Drug Policies that are so ancient they have six inches of Dust...
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Hotler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-05-11 04:55 PM
Response to Reply #102
109. Our Government is running illegal Guns and now Cash?
And drugs. I would bet that drugs are the Feds biggest undercover money maker and has been since WWII.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
deconstruct911 Donating Member (809 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-05-11 06:38 PM
Response to Reply #109
110. Since WW2 is probably very accurate
Some argue when Clark Clifford wrote the national secrity act the main purpose was to cover up the drug trade involvement.

Maybe it would be easy to dismiss if there wasn't so much evidence for cia directed money laundering and the fact that Clifford himself was one of the main suspects on trial for the BCCI scandal.

Regardless of the main source money laundering is big business:

"Senator Carl Levin has gone on record saying: "Estimates are that $500 billion to $1 trillion of international criminal proceeds are moved internationally and deposited into bank accounts annually. It is estimated that half of the money comes to the United States..." The other half is laundered through European banks."
http://www.thehindubusinessline.in/2002/02/11/stories/2...

But it always gets played down:
http://levin.senate.gov/issues/money-laundering
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
newspeak Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-06-11 09:52 AM
Response to Reply #110
111. but money laundering for drugs
there may also be the terrorist connection. So, drugs for weapons-weapons that are used for terrorist activities against civilians. I believe that was also being investigated in the BCCI-iran-contra scandal. Now, I remember when clinton was president, and the democrats attempted to get a banking bill passed to monitor questionable funds going to terrorists--the repugs voted it down. Cut off the flow of funding for terrorism, sure beats the hell out of murdering innocent families by mistake and making more terrorists.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
RainDog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-06-11 03:15 PM
Response to Reply #111
113. yes. the War on Drugs provides a way for terrorists to raise money
so, in essence, the War on Drugs funds terrorism.

great thread.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
deconstruct911 Donating Member (809 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-06-11 03:58 PM
Response to Reply #111
114. ...
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Hotler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-06-11 04:07 PM
Response to Reply #114
115. How old is that toon? eom.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
deconstruct911 Donating Member (809 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-06-11 07:40 PM
Response to Reply #115
117. I decided to find out lol
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Hotler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-06-11 07:49 PM
Response to Reply #117
118. Wow! That toon goes back to the Gary Webb stories. eom.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
wildbilln864 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-05-11 04:06 PM
Response to Original message
106. kick 4 exposure. nt
:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
wildbilln864 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-06-11 05:28 PM
Response to Reply #106
116. & kick again! nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Hotler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-05-11 04:50 PM
Response to Original message
108. kicking n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sun Apr 20th 2014, 09:45 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 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