It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Bin Laden Tried to Poison the U.S. Cocaine Supply

page: 3
<< 1  2   >>

log in


posted on Jul, 26 2005 @ 01:21 PM

Originally posted by dawnstar
Just more proof that Bin Laden has a laptop in his cave!!! And he's read the posts here on ATS....or similar sites. He knows Bush has a coke problem(or believes the posts that claim such), and well, this is his way of an assasination attempt!!!

OMG LMFAO!!!!!!!!

Look I even have link:

posted on Jul, 26 2005 @ 03:00 PM

Originally posted by Hunting Veritas
Nice finds there CatHerder
. Funny......who are the occupying forces of Afghanistan?? coughCoughUKcoughUSCoughCcough

Well, actually you're wrong in your assumption there. Canada has more troops in Afghanistan than the UK does, Canada has ~1,200 there while Britain had under 500 until recently. The US handed military control over to NATO last August (currently a Canadian Brigadier General is in command) and is reducing its troop numbers constantly. The US also wants to pull its troops out of Afghanistan soon and Britain is expected to move 2000-5000 of it's 9000 troops from Iraq to Afghanistan (Britain takes over NATO command in Afghanistan next May, so I'd expect to see them start moving troops over the next 2 or 3 months.)

Why don't the occupying forces just bomb or pollute the poppy fields?
Then a big chunk of Terrorist funding are gone.

So simple isn't it.

I don't think it's that simple. Well, not unless you and I and other taxpayers in the western world decide that, yes, Afghanistan is a priority for foreign aid and we should supplement their economy for $5 billion dollars yearly -- and we'll do it in addition to aid we already give to other nations. According to early United Nations estimates, reconstruction costs for Afghanistan will come to at least US$6.5 billion over the next five years and could total as much as US$25 billion. The US congress is only (currently) willing to pick up $1.6 billion over the next 4 years, so the world is going to have to find the other $23 billion.

You see, Afghanistan is so war torn, so decimated by over 25 years of: Soviet occupation, internal civil wars, and extreme oppressive warlord rule (where they burned down schools, hospitals, stores, sewer treatment plants, water works, power facilities, and anything of value frankly, even military bases) that there is no other option for an income for the vast majority of the Afghani farmers and peasants. If you take away this one income source (which as I mentioned was 5 times the total $ of all other exports) you basically condemn millions of people to further abject poverty and in many cases outright starvation.

The invasion and occupation of Afghanistan in 2002 was for a noble cause. Contrary to whatever conspiracy spins people want to put on it, it's a valid war and it's benefiting the nation and it will continue to benefit Afghanistan’s citizens for the next century (heck they might even get out of the 18th century and into the 19th in the next 2 or 3 years). You can't step into a nation of millions of people and take away 5/6ths of their entire income without something substantial and sustainable to replace it. We need to replace the poppy crops with another viable crop that not only feeds them but also must give them some form of sustainable income. You can't magically pop up oil wells and drop pipelines and instantly generate billions of dollars of revenues overnight. It will happen, but its years away -- in the meantime those people still need some form of income to feed their children and themselves.

Afghanistan doesn't just need foreign aid, it needs trade agreements (free trade with the US, Canada, UK, Japan, etc) that will mean it becomes a self-sufficient nation and not another poverty case like 1/4 of the world is to those nations. This would cost the G-7 nations nothing and benefit them tremendously in the long run as Afghanistan wouldn't continue to be on the foreign aid welfare doll for the next 50 years...

It's easy for you and I to sit in our heated (or air conditioned) room, with electricity powering our computers and our high-speed internet connections, and ponder these sorts of questions while sipping on a Pepsi and munching on a snack. Afghanis currently don't have any of these luxuries, never mind the snack part. I really can't see what taking away this important source of income (opium) without something tangible to replace it (instantly) would do to benefit anyone.

Now, knowing all this: do you still propose your "To hell with you Afghanis, we invaded to solve your problems and hunt down some terrorists, but now you can starve to death because we don't want our junkies (junkies who make 100 times more money in a year by breaking into MY car than an average Afghani will in four, just to feed their addiction) being supplied by your drugs!" ?

posted on Jul, 26 2005 @ 03:37 PM
Where is the logic in thinking that if a coke supply IS poisioned that somehow it would go undetected amongst the users??? It's not like "bad batches" of drugs havent made their round before. So a "few" people die- maybe even a couple of "washington suits"... it would be all over the news and hence "the word on the street would be dont do the coke man... wait until this blows over"... or something along those lines.

It's not like it'll arrive in the states and in that moment it's immediately consumed up everyones nose... well at least I dont think


posted on Jul, 26 2005 @ 04:05 PM
CatHerder made a lot of good points. But somthing still irks me about the validity of this story. To begin with it's a pretty assinine idea for a terrorist attack. Given the fact that people over dose and die every single day it would hardly be much of a surprise to see a few junkies turn up dead. Secondly, those Columbian drug lords are so heavily surveilled by the CIA I think we would know the second OBL or one of his subordinates visited for tea.

And suppose Bin laden was able to acquire the coc aine, how do you suppose he inteded to ship that much coc aine into the States wihtout alerting anyone to the fact that it's Al Qeada coke, especially if you subscribe to the idea that the government has it's hands in coc aine importing and distribution.

However, the main stumbling block for me is how it was reported. This was a front page story? What target audience could "Terrorists almost poison coc aine supply" be geared towards? And then the blatant use of Bin Laden himself to sell the story, we haven't heard much from this guy over the past few years and he decides to come out of hiding to poison coc aine? The black market is much like any other market, with investors, competition, and lots of money to be made. Somthing about this story really seems off to me.

top topics
<< 1  2   >>

log in