View Full Version : The government and CIA run the worlds illicit drug trade
Zeuzzz
5th November 2008, 01:26 PM
Well, not exactly. But at least some of it.
I didn't know whether to post this here, or in the business section. Theres obviously truth to aspects, but theres probably some debunking to do first. Its basically a series of clips from the film "American Drug War: The Last White Hope", so if anyones seen the whole 2 hour documentary, add your opinion on what accurate and whats overblown.
BbfuTv6ZJ8I
From description:
Ten minute clip that shows the govenment and the CIA are utterly guilty of not only importing tons of cocaine into the country but blatently using the media to advertise their product and cause the crack epidemic. Has footage of George Bush Senior holding up a bag of crack in his office, pretty much just advertising it to the world, and shows how the media were subliminally used to make everyone aware of the crack cocaine being imported by the CIA during the Iran contra affair, so it was brought up quickly for their own profit. Also has the famous meeting where former LAPD narcotics officer Mike Rupert blows the cover of John Deutch (the then director of the CIA) by exposing the operation names of three CIA drug smuggling operations on live TV. Also footage of Alex Jones giving former Drug Czar for the US govenment Barry McCaffrey a grilling at a speech because the wife of his head of counter narcotics operations was caught importing tonnes of cocaine. And much more testimony from previous CIA officials on the fake drugs war, information about the money made from the heroin in afghanistan, and lots more.
So, debunk away :D
...Then I'll post the undebunked stuff in the business section, to see what the economists make of it.
Zeuzzz
5th November 2008, 02:24 PM
I think I can establish that;
A) The CIA as a whole is not actually involved in importing drugs, but there have been rogue elements in the agency that have been involved in this is the past, and maybe the present.
B) The government as a whole did not know about this, but maybe a select few were aware of what was/is going on.
C) The reason for invading afghanistan was not solely to get money from their heroin, there were many more factors.
D) George bush senior did not smoke crack in his office.
GodisEnergy
5th November 2008, 02:37 PM
yea also rogue elements of every govt around the world especially the Vatican, form a criminal network of arms,slave trade and drug dealers collectively known as the illuminati
Zeuzzz
5th November 2008, 03:44 PM
yea also rogue elements of every govt around the world especially the Vatican, form a criminal network of arms,slave trade and drug dealers collectively known as the illuminati
Christ, Dont bloody tell eveyone! Its not so secret anymore now is it. Great. Thanks a lot.
Yep, definately should have posted this in the business section.
Zeuzzz
5th November 2008, 06:01 PM
D) George bush senior did not smoke crack in his office.
Actually, I take this one back. Looking at the offspring he produced its inevitable that he would turn to crack to cope.
...Anyone sane gonna comment on the topic of this thread? Or has this thread recieved the conspiracy kiss of death already?
GodisEnergy
5th November 2008, 10:50 PM
Christ, Dont bloody tell eveyone! Its not so secret anymore now is it. Great. Thanks a lot.
Yep, definately should have posted this in the business section.
has never been a secret only to those uneducated in the way of the world
Zeuzzz
6th November 2008, 09:58 AM
bumpy
moon1969
6th November 2008, 01:56 PM
That clip didn"t proove anything. Oliver North and George H.W. Bush did not promote drugs. They just probaly allowed drugs in the country. Reagan, Bush and Oliver North let that happend because anti-communist groups in South America needed funding. If that happend in the Iran Contra affair it doesn"t mean that they still do it. But so what if the anti-communist groups got money from that? It is the Taliban and war lords in Afghanistan who sell the opium and not CIA. If you claim that Vatican is involved in drug trafficking you better show some good proof.
moon1969
6th November 2008, 01:58 PM
Alex Jones is a prooven liar who lied about the Bohemian Grove.
moon1969
6th November 2008, 02:01 PM
And if the CIA does that then the FSB is behind the Russian apartment bombings. Thank God you didn"t blame Mossad about the worlds drug trafficking like Hezbollah and Hamas does.
moon1969
6th November 2008, 02:06 PM
Richard Mellon Scaife tried to like Bill and Hillary Clinton into drug trafficking and Mena drug cartel. Anyway people were claiming during the Vietnam war that CIA was involved in drug trafficking. Maybe they needed money to fund South Vietnam? But there is no real hard proof that government or the CIA had directly been involved in drug trafficking.
moon1969
6th November 2008, 02:17 PM
I agree that they should investigate what Silvio Berlusconi does. CIA doesn"t run the worlds drug trade. I don"t know about Silvio Berlusconi. They say that Iran and North Korea are involved in drug trade. Maybe Evo Morales, Fidel Castro, Daniel Ortega and Hugo Chavez are too? Still it is probaly true that many governments around the world do shady things.
moon1969
6th November 2008, 02:19 PM
Many people have also accused Hezbollah, Hamas, Robert Mugabe and Omar al-Bashir being involved in drug-trafficking.
moon1969
6th November 2008, 02:21 PM
Illuminati doesn"t exist anymore. It was founded by Adam Weishaupt but it doesn"t exist anymore.
moon1969
6th November 2008, 02:54 PM
George H.W. Bush held that back of crack in his hand on Sept. 22, 1989. Iran Contra affair ended in the 1990"s and Bush pardoned alot of people. So when he held that back in his hand I don"t think it was subliminal since there is no proof that it was. So Iran Contra was already over. DEA would probaly disagree with you on many things. But you probaly believe that DEA is apart of the NWO?
moon1969
6th November 2008, 02:57 PM
If CIA helped Frank Lucas or Nicky Barnes then they probaly did that because those two were informants. Many people say that because of Frank Lucas over 30 people went to jail.
sleeplessdwarf
6th November 2008, 03:38 PM
moon, is there a method to your madness? I am sure you have good info to share, but the way you go about it sometimes baffles me. I would hate for some of it to get lost on the people you are trying to educate.
Zeuzzz
6th November 2008, 04:13 PM
errrrr. thanx for the info, I guess.
Is suppose thats one way of pushing up your number of posts a day.
The trouble is we just dont know anything for sure. The drug market is not public, and neither are the intelligence agencies. But i'm sure the good old tactic of follow the money would reveal something if you could trace it all the way to the top.
moon1969
7th November 2008, 09:39 AM
What about ISI and MI6? ISI might be since ISI probaly trains terrorists but there is no proof that MI6 is involved in something like that.
moon1969
7th November 2008, 09:49 AM
Aleister Crowley never worked for MI6 or was an agent but he did have somekind of relationship with MI6.
moon1969
7th November 2008, 10:04 AM
People also have accused freemasons, Skull and Bones, and Knights of Malta or the Order of Malta. It is very serious if you are going to accuse somebody withouth having any credible or reliable evidence.
moon1969
7th November 2008, 10:08 AM
But I got to say my personal favorite is when people blame the "zionists" when the "zionists" really means jews and anti-semites are just trying to be politically correct. Also I like how CT people think that luciferians are evil. Maybe you shouldn"t believe everything you hear, see or read?
nota
7th November 2008, 01:06 PM
Richard Mellon Scaife tried to like Bill and Hillary Clinton into drug trafficking and Mena drug cartel. Anyway people were claiming during the Vietnam war that CIA was involved in drug trafficking. Maybe they needed money to fund South Vietnam? But there is no real hard proof that government or the CIA had directly been involved in drug trafficking.
the CIA ran smack out of the golden triangle to fund not Vietnam actions
as those were very well funded
but for their Cambodan and Laostian actions that were not funded by the USA
I know a CIA mule skinner who was there then and thrown out for getting hooked on the crap while packing it out of the growing areas on mules to get to the places they could fly the smack out on air america the CIA airline
I have seen the black planes that the CIA use to supply the contras inthe 80s
and a now dead buddy who was an airframe meck on them use to complain
about all the coke powder that was left on them after a mission as he had to repair the bullet holes in the aircraft and didnot like the coke makeing his fingers numb as he worked
at the same time the street price of a key of coke droped by 1/2 overnight and alot of CIA connected cubans started trying to move the stuff in miami
it was funny to watch all these guys who were hard core rightwing anti castro
bay of pigs vets suddenly try to be drug dealers without a clue to who to sell the stuff to
sorry no papers or pictures just the view from the street as it happen
moon1969
7th November 2008, 06:02 PM
Another thing. It was John Kerry who exposed Iran Contra and Oliver North. John Kerry is a member of Skull and Bones and part of the NWO so why would he expose Iran Contra? It doesn"t make any sense.
HawksFan
12th November 2008, 03:06 PM
Or has this thread recieved the conspiracy kiss of death already?
It's now not only received the kiss of death, but there has been tounge and a bit of under-clothes fondling as well. :)
Brainster
12th November 2008, 08:02 PM
Looks like the usual gang of idiots; so far I've seen Michael Ruppert and Robert Steele, two characters that should be familiar to us from the 9-11 Troofers.
Praktik
13th November 2008, 08:07 AM
Again I think the title of the OP falls into the common trap of oversimplification of cause and effect. I've complained about this elsewhere but the usual tendency is to claim that when a powerful state involves itself in the cause of a smaller actor, that the state is "running" the smaller actor. Hezbollah is a "tool of Iran", the CIA "created the mujahideen" etc etc....
We should expect, given the vast amount of money in the illicit drug trade that government officials will sometimes be involved with those engaged in its distribution. Whether that means turning a blind eye to a "good drug dealer" that doesn't kill innocents while going after the more violent ones, whether it means some are on the take and funneling intel to drug cartels, or whether it means that sometimes intelligence agencies have used drugs as currency since there is an overlap between arms trading and drug running,.
But, to say that the drug trade is "run" by the CIA is a pretty gross distortion. There is not even one criminal enterprise that could hope to "run" the drug trade except in the pockets of their home country where they monopolize (always temporarily) distribution.
This is not to say that law enforcement and intelligence agencies are not involved to some degree with the more nefarious aspects of the drug trade because its clear that they are.
But the drug trade is seriously, mind-bogglingly HUGE with tentacles into every segment of society and into every country/state/province/city of this world.
No one can run it. But anyone can take part in it.
I would argue that even those squeaky clean, non-corrupt officials involved in busting drug runners are "involved" - by interdicting drugs and toeing the line on the drug war they are in effect maintaining high prices and thus profits for the criminal enterprises engaged in exploiting it. They have a self-interest in furthering their careers, keeping the funding taps running and protecting their bureaucratic status quo.
In that sense, both sides of the drug war are equally involved in "running" the illegal narcotics trade. Its a samba dance - you need two to tango...;)
Nick227
13th November 2008, 08:14 AM
The trouble is we just dont know anything for sure. The drug market is not public, and neither are the intelligence agencies. But i'm sure the good old tactic of follow the money would reveal something if you could trace it all the way to the top.
I think it's fair to say that governments could be taking a great deal more effective stance against drugs if they wanted to. The line seems to be to do things that can be portrayed by the media as "taking action" but that don't actually do anything meaningful, or just exacerbate the situation.
Google "Pino Arlacchi, 10 Year Plan" or "ibogaine" for examples.
Nick
Praktik
13th November 2008, 08:41 AM
The line seems to be to do things that can be portrayed by the media as "taking action" but that don't actually do anything meaningful, or just exacerbate the situation.
"Dope on the table", good for careers, good for ratings... its WIN WIN!
funk de fino
13th November 2008, 10:13 AM
has never been a secret only to those uneducated in the way of the world
Ironic considering your terrible English skills.
GodisEnergy
14th November 2008, 06:41 PM
in the real world where people are getting killed survival and success is not based on taking english exams
skepticalcriticalguy
18th November 2008, 08:11 PM
Kerry didn't expose Iran-Contra. He led the congressional investigation that covered it up, essentially. But gets credited for uncovering the truth.
Another thing. It was John Kerry who exposed Iran Contra and Oliver North. John Kerry is a member of Skull and Bones and part of the NWO so why would he expose Iran Contra? It doesn"t make any sense.
skepticalcriticalguy
18th November 2008, 08:29 PM
A good book on the CIA and drug running is Gary Webb's 'Dark Alliance: The CIA, The Contras, and The Crack Cocaine Explosion'.
Then maybe read 'Kill The Messenger: How The CIA's Crack-Cocaine Controversy Destroyed Journalist Gary Webb'. (His death was ruled a suicide, under suspicious circumstances).
Another you might want to read is Daniel Hopsicker's 'Barry and the Boys: The CIA, The Mob, and America's Secret History,' but you'll probably skip it because for a while Hopsicker was labeled part of the 9/11 Truth movement. (He really wasn't that involved. Also, I think he was debunked here once by Gravy; something about being a liar because he got the date of a fax wrong, or something. Can't remember).
Gangularis
31st January 2009, 07:01 PM
Looks like the usual gang of idiots; so far I've seen Michael Ruppert and Robert Steele, two characters that should be familiar to us from the 9-11 Troofers.
Michael Ruppert may be wrong about 9/11 .. but I sincerely doubt he went from becoming one of the top detectives of the LAPD, to being a resigned outcast, that the LAPD won't even acknowledge as a former employee, just for the joy of relishing in conspiracy theories. He has two ex-cia in his family, a father that was in the Airforce and involved in aerospace projects, and his mother worked in Army Intelligence. In my mind, that lends him a bit of credibility with regards to the CIA and drug trafficking allegations that he's made.
You can see him make his case in this video:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7009998324250484369
Gangularis
31st January 2009, 07:29 PM
But I got to say my personal favorite is when people blame the "zionists" when the "zionists" really means jews and anti-semites are just trying to be politically correct. Also I like how CT people think that luciferians are evil. Maybe you shouldn"t believe everything you hear, see or read?
No, it means they are being precise in placing their blame, and not racist.
This is like saying people that hate the KKK are anti-white. Zionism is a philosophical, political, race based movement. I'm anti Zionism, but I love Jon Stewart, Jerry Seinfeld, and plenty of other Jewish people. It disgusts me to see people hide behind zionism and say anyone that's against zionism is an anti-semite. Weak.
sleeplessdwarf
31st January 2009, 07:54 PM
Michael Ruppert may be wrong about 9/11 .. but I sincerely doubt he went from becoming one of the top detectives of the LAPD, to being a resigned outcast, that the LAPD won't even acknowledge as a former employee, just for the joy of relishing in conspiracy theories. He has two ex-cia in his family, a father that was in the Airforce and involved in aerospace projects, and his mother worked in Army Intelligence. In my mind, that lends him a bit of credibility with regards to the CIA and drug trafficking allegations that he's made.
You can see him make his case in this video:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7009998324250484369
You seem to be going from thread to thread lending weight to the CTs. I may be wrong, so feel free to correct me. I heard the same excuse you gave for Ruppert that others gave to Fulford from Forbes. You may think that Fulford was legit in his interview with David, but if so, I would like you to pay close attention to the start of his tape. He claims that he is so high up in Japan, that he could have David brought to him tied up with a dildo up his ass. Now either you think he could, or he is full of crap. Either way he is still the same Forbes writer he once was.
Dr Adequate
1st February 2009, 09:05 AM
The trouble is we just dont know anything for sure ... But i'm sure Ah, a conspiracy theorist.
zaphod2016
1st February 2009, 09:38 AM
Does the CIA run the worlds illicit drug trade? No.
Are they involved? Beyond a reasonable doubt.
Actually, I take this one back. Looking at the offspring he produced its inevitable that he [GHWB] would turn to crack to cope.
When it comes to W, my money is on Fetal Alcohol Syndrome (http://www.cdc.gov/ncbddd/fas/).
As far as the drug trade goes, there is some hard evidence (http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB2/nsaebb2.htm) regarding Ollie North and his Commie/Coke Contra Crusade.
As far as Afghanistan goes, this was most certainly an aide to the heroin market. From the U.S. DoJ: (http://www.usdoj.gov/ndic/pubs11/18862/heroin.htm)
Despite reported decreases in white heroin production in most source countries, increased production in Afghanistan has resulted in an overall increase in worldwide white heroin production.
The article goes on to say:
However, U.S. drug markets will most likely not be significantly affected by the increase in Afghanistan-produced heroin in the near term.
I find this second point rather dubious, but sadly, I do not think we will have clear statistics on current trends of heroin use for another few years yet. (I can find articles claiming use went up, and other articles claiming use went down or stayed the same). My assumption is that more production = cheaper product = greater sales volume; I see no reason why heroin would be an exception to basic economics.
As for the facts regarding the CIA's involvement in the Afghanistan heroin trade- if the 1980's are any guide, those won't start coming to light until a few folks retire another 10 years or so from now.
© 2001-2009, James Randi Educational Foundation. All Rights Reserved.
vBulletin® v3.7.7, Copyright ©2000-2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.