Originally posted by dragonridr
reply to post by seataka
I can guarantee if they were involved there isnt drugs on the truck.Were not getting the full story from your friend. See the problem i have with this
drugs for the CIA theory is simple,If the drugs weren't coming from mexico it would be South America or Afganistan.Who supplies the most drugs to
the United States changes all the time.And if the US approved of drug trafficking we wouldnt have pressured Mexico to go after the cartel which we
[edit on 7/25/10 by dragonridr]
from south america they would come through mexico, yes?
There is no doubt that the CIA has been importing drugs... the profits are used for black budget activities. "CIA dealing drugs" yields 14,000 hits
If you had an illicit government controlled marketing machine for narcotics, which was making you a HUGE profit.. while rendering your addicts
incapable of resisting your oppressions, you would want to do a few things to assure your continued empire.
1) make sure drugs stay criminalized.. after all it is your pals at Halliburton and the rest of them that are PROFITing from incarcerations. and that
PROFIT can be channeled to lobby firms to maintain control of the system. google "prison industrial complex"
50% of drug incarcerations are for less than an ounce (personal use) - a victimless crime, in this great country, this world military machine, a
country that tells its members this is "democracy" while they use mind control and money to get the "we can vote so we are a democracy" morons to
elect who they want. THE USA has the highest rate of incarcerations in the world... sounds more like a totalitarian regime run by Stalin, who once
held that record.
and think about it, so what if addicts or junkies on the south side are killing each other for the the next dose - that makes more room for the rich
to enjoy their PROFITs.
Also those incarcerated do not vote and do not count on unemployment roles... think about this..
2) If mexican cartels are trying to expand, WHILE refusing to cooperate or pay for protection, then declare a war upon them, as they your competition.
That is the capitalist way, is it not?
I mean who would disagree with a "war on drugs"?
3) Afghanistan has been producing opium for centuries
. If the afghans also refuse to pay tribute, or protection money to your USA
Narco-CIA-Cartel, why just declare them "enemy combatants" who would believe otherwise? You don't.
See this posting that will explain the WHY for last years "surge" of violence in Afghanistan. The head of one of the largest tribes , the Pashtun,
was a man named Noorzai.
When the Judge started asking too many questions the feds changed their prosecutors 3 times, each time switching to a younger and less saavy
prosecutor who would not have to lie to evade the judicial questioning in chambers.
So what if American GIs were killed because of your decision, and because Noorzai is the "BIG WIN" the feather in the cap for the DEA that year...
he became just another pawn in the global money game for PROFIT.
Criminal elements in the Federal government do approve of drug trafficking for THEIR empire built for PROFIT.
Those warlords who played along with the CIA - who were told to export their heroin into China and SE Asia and continue to do so,
Please do more research.
[edit on 25-7-2010 by seataka]