What’s Going on Here? . . . Drug-wise . ., page 1

posted on Mar, 17 2006 @ 07:58 PM

link

The United States does not like Venezuela. We don’t like the new woman president of Bolivia. We don’t like the government of Peru. Or of Chile. Or of Brazil. We do like the government of Columbia! The major source of coc aine and its debilities in the United States. Columbia is on our list of ALLIES. Hmm?

The Taliban ruled Afghan. They did not allow the poor Afghan farmers to grow the infamous poppy plant. The source of morphine and heroin. Then the Taliban made the United States mad. They sheltered Osama b. Laden. We killed most of the Taliban and took over Afghan. Then we left. We praised $20 B. but deliver only $2 B. Americans have both short memories and shot staying powers. As soon as the Taliban was gone, the Afghan poor farmers began growing poppy. Now Afghan is the major supplier of the raw materials for heroin and morphine. But, danger ahead for addicts, the Taliban is making a comeback! That will spell the END of your American protected sources of morphine and heroin. Hmm?

Why is that?

fingapointa

posted on Mar, 17 2006 @ 10:56 PM

link

The Taliban may have only stopped opium production in 1999-2000 in response to the promise of funding from the international community.

"To respond to the poppy ban, I would like to announce a $1.5 million U.S. pledge to the United Nations Drug Control Program's Short Term Assistance Project to sustain the ban on poppy cultivation in Nangarhar province in Afghanistan. U.S. funding for this project will focus on short-term assistance to enhance household food security and to mitigate the hardships of the most vulnerable groups of small landholders mid the landless in Nangarhar. Small landholders will be provided with improved seeds and fertilizers. Food-for-work schemes will be implemented for the landless and sharecroppers. We will continue to look for additional assistance for farmers affected by the poppy ban." --U.S. Department Of State, August 2, 2001

***

"We act also because the al-Qaida network and the Taliban regime are funded in large part on the drugs trade. Ninety per cent of all heroin sold in Britain originates from Afghanistan. Stopping that trade is, again, directly in our interests." --Prime Minister Blair in an address to the British people on the ongoing attacks on Afghanistan, 10/7/01

www.bushwatch.com...

A resurgence in the Taliban may not necessarily mean a reduction in poppy production. Just because they're militant terrorists, doesn't mean they won't make decisions based on economic reasons. The Taliban were prepared to take money from the U.S. and others in 2000-01, for what was really, a brutal operation of eradication . I don't think they could get away with the same thing today and I don't think anyone's going to pony up the cash for a Taliban based eradication program. The demand side of the equation requires a serious looking at, as well, I.M.O.

iori_komei

posted on Mar, 17 2006 @ 11:05 PM

link

Good, so we're not gonna wipe drugs out of America, like it could ever even happen.

I'd like it if the U.S gov. would stop being stupid and be friends with Venezuela and the rest of S.America.

I personally don't have a problem with drugs, people should be able to do what they like, anyway, this whole thing does'nt surprise me.

Merger

posted on Mar, 18 2006 @ 01:34 AM

link

Very interesting findings...

With regards to afghan, i know that the US wanted a pipeline (for oil) to be sent from the stans above to south of afghanistan, another supposed reason to get rid of the taliban.

Also do some research into stock market companies....... apparently when money is being placed into the bank account of companies on the stock market, there is no need for reporting of it (unlike other large sums of cash, which reports are supposedly written just in case the money is drug money)...so an avenue of drug money to be transferred through the stock exchange.

From research I've done, apparently 600 billion dollars (a year) of drug money is transferred through the US stock exchange....... a lot of it decreased before the invasion of afghanistan.......and back up again when they removed the taliban.....

And I watched a short video too....that CIA stands for Cocaine Import Agency...i thought that was rather amusing..... oh well

Kind Regards
Merger

donwhite

posted on Mar, 18 2006 @ 10:17 AM

link

Originally posted by fingapointa[/I] The Taliban may have only stopped opium production in response to the promise of funding from the international community.

With regards to Afghan . . the US wants a oil pipeline from the -stans to south Afghanistan, another reason to get rid of the Taliban . . Apparently when money is placed into stock market accounts , there is no reporting unlike other large cash deposits which are reported in case it is drug money .

I DON’T KNOW. We hear all this talk that accuses any country we don’t “like” as being involved in drug running. It is nearly impossible for an ordinary citizen to know the truth because, in the case of Cuba, for example, I cannot get a passport or visa to go there. Hey, it’s America, land of the free and home of the brave. Hmm?

IT IS impossible for me to accept that the United States of America, world’s last standing super power, cannot stop coc aine from Columbia entering the U.S. in huge quantities. In the 1960s, the CIA boasted their new Key Hole satellites - KH12s - could read license plates on cars parked in the Kremlin’s lot. Supposedly this capability allowed the CIA to conjecture who was attending various meetings and etc.

AN AWACs plane can - so they say - monitor “over” 200 other targets in the air over a 500 miles radius. Back in the 1960s we dropped listening devices on the Ho Chi Minh Trail that were capable of transmitting to satellites “parked” overhead and we could sometimes actually overhear the NVA talking as they marched south. So they said. We know we have night vision capability and see in the dark infra red capability on our Apache and Blackhawk choppers. We know we can drop a bomb down a chimney - seen that picture 100s of times - using F117As stealth plus laser guided bombs. So we are told. We still have 30 nuclear subs that can go so terrifically fast underwater - maybe 45 knots - dive so deep and have sonar so accurate it can identify migrating whales by name, so they say.

BUT WE can’t stop a few poor, semi-literate Columbian Indians growing cocoa trees, harvesting the crop, hauling it to processing plants, packaging it in transportable size, hauling it out of the mountains, down to the seashore, loading in onto ships or airplanes, sending it north and then unloading it somewhere in the US., stockpiling it, re-packing it, shipping it via cars or trucks all across the U S of A, so that your own local coke dealer is always in full supply of a product that gets cheaper by the decade.

And they call this HOMELAND SECURITY?

Mod Edit: Quoting Etiquette – Please Review This Link.

[edit on 22-3-2006 by DontTreadOnMe]

AmenToArtillery

posted on Mar, 19 2006 @ 02:10 PM
link

We've other matters at had that seem to be deemed more important then the drug problem, atleast on the global scale of things. But that does not mean we arent attempting to handle the drug problem, it's just the fact that you dont hear about it too much as much of the operations would be deemed clandestine. You ask why we cant handle a few semi-literate Columbians? Perhaps it is because some of the "merchants" have rather well trained soldiers who excel in guirella combat, where in which we would have to make our war with them un-conventional- making use of SpecOps, CIA Intelligence, etc. Of course, there are some runners that could easily be taken out with ease but there are indeed some that would require special attention.

The war on drugs is much like the war on Terrorism. There are so many variables in play that one can not attack justly from the front. You seem quite intelligent, as I'm sure you understand what I mean.

Nonetheless, I do know that there are Naval detachments currenty in S. America running operations, just as I'm sure there are many other forces the public may not know about openly.

mrwupy

posted on Mar, 19 2006 @ 02:27 PM
link

As long as there is a demand a supply will rise to meet it. That’s simple economics. The world does not have a drug problem, it has a people problem.

Imagine for a moment they eradicated all the poppy plants and there was no more opium or heroin. The users would just turn to coc aine. So they eliminate all the coca plants and there is no more coke, the users would start sniffing glue. They quit making sniff able glue, the users would turn to pot or booze.

I believe addiction can be cured just like any other illness. I also believe that all the money being spent on the so-called drug war is being wasted. Remove the demand and the supply will go away. Find a cure for addiction and the drug lords can grow all the dope they want and then have to sit on it because no one would buy it.

This war will not be won in the fields of Columbia or Afghanistan, but in the heads of those buying the drugs.

Remove the demand and the supply will go away.

Just my thoughts on it,

Wupy

donwhite

posted on Mar, 20 2006 @ 07:36 PM
link

Originally posted by AmenToArtillery[/I] We have other matters at hand that seem to be deemed more important then the drug problem, But we are attempting to handle the drug problem, it's just the fact that you don’t hear about much as much of the operations would be deemed clandestine.

I am highly skeptical about any government action that cannot be revealed or openly discussed because it is “clandestine.” Incompetence and misfeasance are frequently hidden behind government claims of SECRECY. In 1939, Pres. Roosevelt declared a War on Crime! In 1964, Pres. Johnson declared a War on Poverty. In 1969, Pres. Nixon declared a War on Drugs. In 2001, Pres. Bush declared a War on Terrorism. One thing is for sure, AMERICANS DO LOVE WAR!

When are we gong to win one of these wars?

You ask why cant we handle a few semi-literate Columbians? Perhaps it is because some of the "merchants" have rather well trained soldiers who excel in guerrilla combat, where in which we would have to make our war with them un-conventional- making use of SpecOps, CIA Intelligence, etc.

Richard Pryor became “famous” when he was burned using a pipe to “smoke” coke. 1982. Q. When did Pres. Bush #1 preemptively invade Panama to seize Gen. Manuel Noriega, formerly OUR MAN in Panama? A. 1989.

So let’s ignore all the coc aine from Columbia BEFORE 1982. Here it is, 2006, and “crack” coke - a cheap derivative - is openly sold in some places for $2. I’m from Louisville, which is a “backwater” town, and crack was $5 a hit, in 2005, I’m told. Maybe we ought to have some OPEN debate on the tactics used to INTERRUPT the steady flow of coc aine from Columbia for at least the last 24 years? TWENTY-FOUR YEARS.

The war on drugs is much like the war on Terrorism. There are so many variables in play that one can not attack just from the front. Nonetheless, I do know that there are Naval detachments [SEALS?] currently in S. America running operations, just as I'm sure there are many other forces the public may not know about openly.

BUT TO WHAT ADVANTAGE? How long to you pay for a loser? Maybe we ought to hire Blackwater? Or General Dynamics? But TWENTY-FOUR YEARS? Shee-it, some of our guys will have RETIRED on the Columbia coke war!

Nygdan

posted on Mar, 22 2006 @ 11:50 AM
link

The taliban stopped opium production by executing opium farmers and threatening their families and neighbhors. The current afghan government doesn't terrorise its population into submission on this matter, thus, opium production has gone up.

Do you suggest that the US start carpet bombing towns the aid in opium production, or round up those towns into camps and execute everyone? And that the US do the same in bolivia and other south american countries?