Drug addiction fattens Banksters wallets, CIA

[happydreams]

Drug Addiction Lucrative for Neolib Banksters, CIA
Thursday May 18th 2006, 7:05 pm

http://kurtnimmo.com/?p=369

“An American counternarcotics official was killed and two other Americans wounded in a suicide bombing in western Afghanistan today, while heavy fighting between Taliban insurgents and Afghan police continued in two southern provinces, officials said,” reports the New York Times. “We confirm that a U.S. citizen contractor for the State Department Bureau of International Narcotic and Law Enforcement, working for the police training program in Herat was killed in a vehicle-borne I.E.D. attack,” Chris Harris, an American Embassy spokesman, told the newspaper. After this mention, the Times moves on to detail the increasing violence between Afghan puppet police and “militants,” that is to say Afghans fighting against the occupation of their country, an entirely natural occurrence.

Of course, the Times does not bother to mention that the Afghan opium trade—in fact much of the opium trade in the so-called “Golden Crescent” (Iran, Afghanistan and Pakistan)—was cultivated and nurtured by the United States government and the CIA, leading to countless cases of miserable heroin addiction in America and Europe. Reading the Times, we get the impression the Taliban—at one time sponsored by the CIA and Pakistan’s intelligence services, so long as they were kicking Russian hindquarter—are responsible for the opium trade all on their lonesome. As usual, the Times twists the story through omission.

“ClA-supported Mujahedeen rebels … engaged heavily in drug trafficking while fighting against the Soviet-supported government,” writes historian William Blum. “The Agency’s principal client was Gulbuddin Hekmatyar, one of the leading druglords and a leading heroin refiner. CIA-supplied trucks and mules, which had carried arms into Afghanistan, were used to transport opium to laboratories along the Afghan/Pakistan border. The output provided up to one half of the heroin used annually in the United States and three-quarters of that used in Western Europe. U.S. officials admitted in 1990 that they had failed to investigate or take action against the drug operation because of a desire not to offend their Pakistani and Afghan allies,” and also because selling heroin and spreading misery is highly profitable. In fact, the Soviets attempted to impose an opium ban on the country and this resulted in a revolt by tribal groups eventually exploited by the CIA and Pakistan.

<snip>

Before 1980, Afghanistan produced 0% of the world’s opium. But then the CIA moved in, and by 1986 they were producing 40% of the world’s heroin supply. By 1999, they were churning out 3,200 TONS of heroin a year—nearly 80% of the total market supply. But then something unexpected happened. The Taliban rose to power, and by 2000 they had destroyed nearly all of the opium fields. Production dropped from 3,000+ tons to only 185 tons, a 94% reduction! This enormous drop in revenue subsequently hurt not only the CIA’s Black Budget projects, but also the free-flow of laundered money in and out of the Controller’s banks.

<snip>

In addition to turning immense profits for societal parasites and other cockroach infestations on Wall Street, drug dealing is a great way for the government to intervene in the business of other nations, as Oliver North well understands (as the Contra was funded by the smuggling of cocaine). “The CIA functionally gains influence and control in governments corrupted by criminal narco-trafficking. Politically, the CIA exerts influence by leveraging narco-militarists and corrupted politicians… This is really NEO-narco-colonialism, whereby local criminal proxies do the bidding of the patron government seeking expanded influence. But because of the quid-pro-quo of protecting the criminal proxies’ illicit pipelines, the result is still a functional narco-colonialism, involving a narcotics commodity in the actual practical execution of policy, with the very different twist of covert action,” summarizes the CIA & Drugs website: http://ciadrugs.homestead.com/files/index.html

[Turbineguy]

1. Nearly all dope money floats to the top

in fact almost everybody who does not buy dope, benefits from those who do. Narcotics is a major economic force in our country.

Example: I have a good stereo in my car. Some doper breaks a window and steals it. He sells it for 30 bucks. Some jerk buys it and gets a great stereo for cheap. I pay $250 for the deductible, the insurance company coughs up $300 more and I have the the hifi place add a $400 alarm system.

If it weren't for dope none of these people would be working or getting rich.

Huge law enforcement agencies and jails exist to service this asset. That's why the war on drugs has always been a failure. As long as there are those willing to throw themselves away, the rest of us benefit. As soon as those who use dope realize that they are not so much using as being used, the whole problem would go away.

[happydreams]

2. Interesting case illustration. I'd like to point out

that the jails are paid for by you and me as well, so this does have a dampening effect on the get rich aspect.

[Mandate My Ass]

3. The prisons are being run "for profit"

by the same banksters that are profiting in other ways.

Mandatory minimums? The reason we lock up dope smokers for longer time than violent criminals is to keep the prison industry racking up scandalous profits for poor service. Some are cutting back to two meals a day or refuse to dispense needed meds for chronic conditions. And yes, prisoners do have the right to be treated humanely.

[happydreams]

5. Sure, some are "privatized", but their contract is with a

government.

[sutz12]

4. But the point is...

that there is no incentive to actually "win" the War on Drugs. If they ever won it, many cops and guards would be out of work. The whole thing is self supporting.