It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
WASHINGTON — Usama bin Laden tried to buy a massive amount of coc aine, spike it with poison and sell it in the United States, hoping to kill thousands of Americans one year after the Sept. 11 attacks, The Post has learned.
The evil plot failed when the Colombian drug lords bin Laden approached decided it would be bad for their business — and, possibly, for their own health, according to law-enforcement sources familiar with the Drug Enforcement Administration's probe of the aborted transaction.
The feds were told of the scheme earlier this year, but its existence had never been made public. The Post has reviewed a document detailing the DEA's findings in the matter, in addition to interviewing sources familiar with the case.
If Osama bin Laden didn’t exist it would be necessary to invent him’
Some on the left (and not just on the left) have talked of the invasion of Iraq as creating the conditions for the carnage we witnessed in London this week but I question the logic behind this argument.
I am reminded of a statement made some time back that ‘if Osama bin Laden didn’t exist it would have been necessary to invent him’ for if, as I contend that to justify the ‘war on terror’ it was necessary to invent the terrorist threat first, then come hell or high water, acts such as the London bombing are a necessary and inevitable result of the larger strategic mission of the USUK to justify their even greater acts of carnage and aggression. Thus whether directly or indirectly, I contend that the governments of Bush and Blair are complicit partners in these acts of terror.
People need to ask themselves whether an organisation allegedly dedicated to driving the ‘infidel’ from Arab countries is likely to succeed by blowing up ordinary working people on the streets of London? Everything about ‘al-Qu’eda’ stinks of set up, from its origins in Saudi Arabia to its alleged role in 9/11. Then there are the bizarre actions of the US government preceding and following 9/11 that even has millions of Americans wondering what the hell their government is up to.
So who stands to gain from the bombings? Surely not al-Qu’eda unless that is, al-Qu’eda is in actuality a US creation. There are lessons to be learned from the US ‘war on drugs’ that followed a somewhat similar path insofar as under the pretext of eradicating coc aine production in Colombia, it not only supported a regime that was inextricably connected to trafficking in coc aine, it gave the US a pretext to set up bases and wage a war not on coc aine but on the liberation movement that threatened its investments.
Earlier still, during its war on the people of Vietnam, the US through the CIA and Air America trafficked in heroin and later, the CIA performed a similar role in its illegal support for the contras in Nicaragua using the sale of coc aine to fund its operations in the ‘guns for drugs’ operation run by Colonel ‘Ollie’ North.
Originally posted by Hunting Veritas
Soooooo other than Fox news, who else reported this story?
"It is important we recognize that when money goes from the pocket of an American to buy drugs, it may contribute to the financing of unspeakable crimes of violence around the world," Hutchinson told Congress that year when he detailed the narcotics trade connection to al Qaeda and other terror groups.
Originally posted by marg6043
Funny that I would will not be surprise if the "causalties" would have been in the goverment ranks, so I would have been delighted with the nice clean up.
Too bad that in the clean up many regular Americans would have been targeted.
But it would be a nice way to combine the two futile efforts of our time... the War on Terror and the War on Drugs.