OAS chief calls for drug violence debate

[Peace Patriot]

4. I think that Insulza and the rightwing presidents of Colombia and Guatemala

(both of whom have come out publicly for complete legalization) are fronting for a Big Pharma/Big Ag/Big Chem plan to take over and monopolize the huge market in herbal, recreational or addictive drugs, and that, given who these leaders are (presidents of U.S. client states) and who Insulza is--a tool of the U.S. government--they are probably "running it up the flagpole" FOR the U.S. government.

I doubt that the president of Colombia, in particular--a country that has been the recipient of $7 BILLION in U.S. "war on drugs" aid and is the new U.S. "free trade for the rich" partner in Latin America--would dare to go public about legalization without some kind of okay from Washington. It's just not realistic to think otherwise.

The president of Guatemala is even less likely to be proposing legalization for good government reasons. He has ties to the genocide against the Mayans during the Reagan junta. He's not just rightwing; he's a fascist, traditionally addicted to U.S. military aid and dependent on Washington for political and other support.

And it is quite remarkable, in my view, that proposing legalization has NOT come from the many countries with LEFTIST governments. In fact, it's jaw-dropping that it is the Latin American rightwing, not the leftwing, making this proposal.

Insulza chiming in just confirms my suspicions.

A couple of other facts are relevant. One is that the U.S. "war on drugs" in Colombia was used to brutally displace FIVE MILLION peasant farmers from their lands during the Uribe/Bush Jr. crime wave. And only AFTER their displacement do we get this legalization proposal by the (new) president of Colombia. With the peasants cleared off the lands (and many labor leaders and other advocates for the poor murdered), now Big Pharma, Big Ag and Big Chem can utilize the U.S. "free trade for the rich" agreement for several purposes, among them growing coca plants and marijuana (and probably highly doctored products--think GMOs and pesticides).

Another thing to consider is the U.S. DOJ's war on small marijuana entrepreneurs in California and other western states--people who have businesses that are LEGAL in their states, but whose businesses and lives are being destroyed by the Feds. It looks very much like the clearing out of the peasants in Colombia--eliminating the small players, before the Big Baricudas make their move.

On the negative side--against my notion that Insulza, Santos and Molina are fronting for the U.S. government--there is A LOT OF MONEY BEING MADE by hunting down, prosecuting and imprisoning people for drug use and drug businesses--an endemic addiction to taxpayers' money for civic militarism, abuse of civilians, especially the poor, the highest imprisonment rate in the world, and self-righteous bombast. Federal and state police agencies, prosecutors, judges, courts, private and government prisons, lawyers, weapons manufacturers, spies, high tech surveillance companies, and all businesses and manufacturers that serve "drug warriors" are draining billions of dollars from U.S. taxpayers, and that is not even to mention the Pentagon's involvement and use of the "war on drugs" to expand its military bases and operations in Latin America and the Caribbean.

Obviously--if my suspicion is right, that Big Pharma, Big Ag and Big Chem want to take over the trillion+ dollar illicit drug market--the Obama administration must tread carefully, and must weigh the interests of their two masters--the police/military industry vs. the transglobal corporate establishment that is eyeing all that cleared, rich land in Colombia with its "free trade for the rich" rules. Obviously they need others to start the ball rolling. And just as obviously, the financial boon of legalization to the federal government would be huge, both in costs saved and revenue gained.

But what to do with all those DEA agents, and SWAT teams, and prison cells, and drug interdiction helicopters and so on (and on)? It's not the kind of thing Obama does well--cutting military-industrial complex budgets and re-directing economies. Maybe Jeb'll do it, when he's Diebolded into the White House. Wouldn't that be cute?

We the People don't ever get a break without there being a significant downside that keeps us all poor. They raise the "minimum wage" and gas prices double. We get our earned Social Security check and find they've taken a big chunk out of it for Medicare. Medicare only covers 80% of medical costs for the elderly and disabled, which seems reasonable until medical costs are permitted to skyrocket. Then that 20% means bankruptcy and not eating, for many people. We may get an end to the corrupt, murderous, failed "war on drugs"--after nearly half a century of squandered billions and escalating domestic fascism--but we may have to swallow another Bush, and/or yet more corporate domination for that 'benefit.'

What will be done with our police state is a factor in the legalization build-up that needs more analysis. This would be the chief quandary for those contemplating legalization, especially our government (if they are).

The movement toward legalization of marijuana here is another factor in the mix, as is corporate control of our voting machines. The movement is genuine, but are the votes? Why is ES&S/Diebold permitting this to happen? They absolutely have the power to stop it. Why aren't they (especially given ES&S's far rightwing connections)?

It's POSSIBLE that Obama, seeing the wisdom of ending the "war on drugs," is USING Big Pharma, Big Ag and Big Chem to get it done. That would fit with his mode of doing things. But if this were the case, why is he persecuting small marijuana entrepreneurs? He has the option to put such punitive federal activities on the back-burner. In fact, that's what he pledged to do during the campaign. Yet he has permitted aggressive suppression of this innocent herb and all those small farmers and brilliant plant biologists and small business people and political advocates who have developed the marijuana product and market. It's looking a lot more like a Big Pharma, Big Ag, Big Chem plan that he has to figure out how to implement--that they are the "tail" wagging the "dog" (as is true on many issues).

That is, IF I am right about why rightwingers are the ones pushing legalization in Latin America--that they are doing so with a Washington okay; that they are fronting for a plan that is going to unfold here. (And what plans unfold here that are NOT Big Corporate plans? None.)

One more element I want to mention: The corruption of the U.S. "war on drugs" is vast, and likely includes using the "war on drugs" to profit from the illicit drug trade--for instance, "scorched earth" against the peasants in Colombia, with the cocaine stream NEVER ENDING, which means that some of the big players have been favored, probably those who pay for protection and infuse the profits into U.S. banksters' banks, the CIA and other beneficiaries. I am sure this was true with Uribe coming to power under the Bush Junta. Uribe was/is notorious for his ties to drug lords and rightwing death squads. He was getting U.S./Bush Junta help to spy on judges and prosecutors! This and other Bush Junta crimes in Colombia was likely a significant problem for the Obama administration (how to cover it up, as they have other Bush Junta crimes).

What is going on with this aspect of the "war"? Who would benefit and who would be harmed by legalization? Are the favored drug lords already allied with Big Pharma, Big Ag and Big Chem, and/or planning to become big, legit, transglobal drug corporations in their own right?

Don't get me wrong. I am 1,000% FOR the legalization of all drugs and complete dismantling of the "war on drugs" immediately, EVEN WITH more corporate rule. Aside from the U.S. wars on Vietnam and Iraq/Afghanistan, the "war on drugs" is the WORST--bloodiest, most corrupt--U.S. government policy in the modern era. Even if we have to accept CORPORATE drug pushing and profiteering of formerly illegal herbal, recreational or addictive drugs, so be it. The bloodshed must be stopped.

But we need to learn--on this matter and all matters--to be skeptical of official narratives and not fall prey to superficial thinking. We have been manipulated and fooled in so many ways, and our democracy has been smashed in so many ways, by means of official narratives and extremely superficial, propagandistic "talking points." We need to keep our eyes open, and advocate for the robbed and beaten as well as we can--and for ORGANIC drugs and fair trade, as well as we can.