Friday, December 11, 2009

CIA Efforts to Control World Distribution of 'Illicit' Drugs

by Len Hart, The Existentialist Cowboy

DEA agents were photographed among first responders on 911. That's curious. What interest have drug enforcement agents in this alleged act of 'terrorism'?

Connect some dots: upon the 911 pretext, the US invaded Afghanistan whose 'cash crop' of 'poppies' was under threat. Without poppies, US drug dealers may be hard pressed to stay in business. That applies, as well, to the CIA which most certainly financed Iran-Contra almost entirely 'off the books'.

If the US/CIA hoped to control this lucrative trade, the Taliban had to go. I wonder how many CIA 'black ops' have been financed 'off the books' (as was Iran/Contra) with the proceeds of its various drug sales?
An August, 1996, series in the San Jose Mercury News by reporter Gary Webb linked the origins of crack cocaine in California to the contras, a guerrilla force backed by the Reagan administration that attacked Nicaragua's Sandinista government during the 1980s. Webb's series, "The Dark Alliance," has been the subject of intense media debate, and has focused attention on a foreign policy drug scandal that leaves many questions unanswered.

This electronic briefing book is compiled from declassified documents obtained by the National Security Archive, including the notebooks kept by NSC aide and Iran-contra figure Oliver North, electronic mail messages written by high-ranking Reagan administration officials, memos detailing the contra war effort, and FBI and DEA reports. The documents demonstrate official knowledge of drug operations, and collaboration with and protection of known drug traffickers. Court and hearing transcripts are also included.

--The Contras, Cocaine, and Cover Operations
U.S. govt 'Dirty Tricks' are bankrolled 'off the books', primarily drug sales. It should be clear by now --drug revenues are the source of US/CIA interest in Afghanistan and its antipathy to the Taliban which had insisted upon upon control of its own cash crop --poppies.
“Given the global context of the war on drugs-coupled with growing recognition since September 11, 2001 (9/11), of the nexus between drug trafficking and terrorism-the mission of the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) and efforts to forge effective interagency partnerships and coordination are increasingly important. the Government Accountability Office was asked to examine, in the context of the post-9/11 environment, DEA’s priorities, interagency partnerships and coordination mechanisms, and strategic plan and performance measures. GAO reviewed DEA policy, planning, and budget documents and visited 7 of DEA’s 21 domestic field offices and 3 of its 7 regional offices abroad-sites selected to reflect diverse drug-trafficking threats, among other factors. GAO also contacted other relevant federal agencies-including U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP)-and various state and local partner agencies.

-GAO Report on DEA’s Post-9/11 Drug Control Responsibilities
Let's cut to the chase: that 'nexus between drug trafficking and terrorism' is called the CIA. The CIA finances 'black ops' and 'secret operations' off the books by trafficking in drugs. Is there any doubt that Bush Sr's sudden disillusionment with Manuel Noriega had to do with Noriega either demanding a bigger cut or daring to control the supply?
He [Bush Sr] ordered the invasion of Panama, which began just after midnight on December 20, 1989. It was the twelfth U.S. invasion of that country since 1903. The mission of U.S. forces was to depose long-time CIA asset General Manuel Noriega, an indicted drug trafficker. It was the largest airborne assault since World War II. When it was over, the Army excluded the press and Red Cross from entering heavily bombed areas for three days while soldiers incinerated some civilian casualties and buried others in mass graves.

Bush’s Defense Secretary, Richard Cheney claimed a death toll of between 500 and 600. But independent human rights groups put the death toll between 3,000 and 5,000 with about 25,000 left homeless. This military operation turned out to be practice for even greater press censorship, propaganda and human rights violations during and after Operation Desert Storm, the U.S. air and ground attack that failed to depose Iraq’s leader, Saddam Hussein, in 1990. That failure eventually eroded public confidence in Bush and contributed to his defeat by Bill Clinton in the 1992 presidential election.

--Famous Texans, George H.W. Bush
In Afghanistan, a similar motive may be ascribed to US 'interests' but, certainly, a different modus operandi. The Taliban had, in fact, threatened to wipe out the poppy fields and end the traffic. Could the CIA tolerate this affrontery? Would the CIA tolerate the loss of revenue?
CIA operations follow the same recurring script. First, American business interests abroad are threatened by a popular or democratically elected leader. The people support their leader because he intends to conduct land reform, strengthen unions, redistribute wealth, nationalize foreign-owned industry, and regulate business to protect workers, consumers and the environment. So, on behalf of American business, and often with their help, the CIA mobilizes the opposition. First it identifies right-wing groups within the country (usually the military), and offers them a deal: "We'll put you in power if you maintain a favorable business climate for us." The Agency then hires, trains and works with them to overthrow the existing government (usually a democracy).

--Steve Kangas, A Timeline of CIA Atrocities

Pakistan is a case in point.
Since 9/11, the Bush administration has been propping up Musharraf's military regime with $3.6 billion in economic aid from the US and a US-sponsored consortium, not to mention $900 million in military aid and the postponement of overdue debt repayments totaling $13.5 billion. But now the administration is debating whether Musharraf has become too dependent on Islamic extremist political parties in Pakistan to further US interests, and whether he should be pressured to permit the return of two exiled former prime ministers, Benazir Bhutto and Nawaz Sharif, who have formed an electoral alliance to challenge him in presidential elections scheduled for next year.

--Pakistan: Friend or Foe? The US shouldn't prop up President Musharraf's military regime, Selig S. Harrison

The late Benazir Bhutto revealed the truth before she was brutally gunned down in the streets of Karachi: US policy causes world terrorism. She died before she could tell the rest of the story.
When the United States aligns with dictatorships and totalitarian regimes, it compromises the basic democratic principles of its foundation -- namely, life, liberty and justice for all. Dictatorships such as Musharraf's suppress individual rights and freedoms and empower the most extreme elements of society. Oppressed citizens, unable to represent themselves through other means, often turn to extremism and religious fundamentalism.

Benazir Bhutto, A False Choice for Pakistan

--Why the CIA is the World's Number One Terrorist Organization
The amount of monies involved is not chicken feed.
Last year, Afghanistan produced nearly 4,000 tons of opium, about 75 percent of the world's supply, U.N. officials said. Opium -- the milky substance drained from the poppy plant -- is converted into heroin and sold in Europe and North America. The 1999 output was a world record for opium production, the United Nations said -- more than all other countries combined, including the "Golden Triangle," where the borders of Thailand, Laos and Myanmar meet.

Mullah Mohammed Omar, the Taliban's supreme leader, banned poppy growing before the November planting season and augmented it with a religious edict making it contrary to the tenets of Islam.

The Taliban, which has imposed a strict brand of Islam in the 95 percent of Afghanistan it controls, has set fire to heroin laboratories and jailed farmers until they agreed to destroy their poppy crops.

The U.N. surveyors, who completed their search this week, crisscrossed Helmand, Kandahar, Urzgan and Nangarhar provinces and parts of two others -- areas responsible for 86 percent of the opium produced in Afghanistan last year, Frahi said in an interview Wednesday. They covered 80 percent of the land in those provinces that last year had been awash in poppies.

--Afghanistan, Opium and the Taliban


David B. Dancy said...

There is a great documentary entitled the last white hope on the drug conspiracy and its all encompassing effect on the American people. our Government has no moral opinion on drugs there exists a leverage in keeping them Illegal. It is, at its core, a racist policy.
The rich consume illicit drugs at a much higher rate than thew average joe but never suffer the full legal consequences. The paradigm is changing as the demand continues. The large profits reaped by our sworn enemies leaves us at a crossraods. We should simply come clean about our involvement in drug trade and regulate it legally.
It is the best option for the American people.

Unknown said...

David B. Dancy said...

It is, at its core, a racist policy.

You are absolutely correct, David.

The rich consume illicit drugs at a much higher rate than thew average joe but never suffer the full legal consequences. The paradigm is changing as the demand continues.

And even at that, the amt they spend is an increasingly tiny PERCENTAGE of their income even if their total consumption is much higher than that of anyone not among the elite class.

I have to believe that it's all by design. Certainly, the economic policies that transfer wealth upward is pre-meditated, planned, and exploited.

We should simply come clean about our involvement in drug trade and regulate it legally.
It is the best option for the American people.

Don't hold your breath! Keeping it illegal, means 'they' RETAIN control of both supply and price (as if one were independent of the other). Certainly, controlling the world's supply of opium is very nearly as good as controlling the world's supply of GOLD. Perhaps, even better!

Mr. Natural said...

Let's see now...where WAS that 'golden triangle' again? Oh yes, VietNam/Laos/Burma/Thailand. Dig into that and you see very very similar players as 9-11/AfPak/Iran.

Nothing new to see here folks - just America doing what it does best...