Posted on 09/27/2001 5:36:38 AM PDT by Stand Watch Listen
On December 19, 2000 the United Nations adopted Resolution 1333 "strongly condemns the continuing use of the areas of Afghanistan under the Control of the Afghan faction known as Taliban...for the sheltering and training of terrorists and planning of terrorist acts,." The resolution also noted that the "Taliban benefits directly from the cultivation of illicit opium by imposing a tax on its production and indirectly benefits from the processing and trafficking of such opium" and that the resources gained by the Taliban strengthened its "capacity to harbor terrorists."
On Afghanistan's Western border is Iran. Approximately 50% of Afghanistan's production of opium, hashish, morphine, heroin and marijuana ends up in Iran where it is further processed and sent on its way (See Map - http://www.undcp.org/iran/country_profile_annex1a.pdf ) mostly to Turkey. From Turkey, the drug route for Afghan drugs headed to Europe is across Bulgaria, Macedonia, Kosovo and Albania. The CIA Factbook says of Albania, "Illicit Drugs: increasingly active transshipment point for Southwest Asian opiates, hashish, and cannabis transiting the Balkan route and - to a far lesser extent - cocaine from South America destined for Western Europe; limited opium and cannabis production; ethnic Albanian narcotrafficking organizations active and rapidly expanding in Europe.
Columbia, which is the Western Hemisphere's largest producer of coca, the raw material for cocaine, according to the CIA had over 300,000 acres in coca, the base for cocaine, and nearly 20,000 acres in opium poppies in 1999. It supplies about 90% of the cocaine in the United States and the majority of the cocaine to other international drug markets as well as much of the heroin used in the US.
Afghanistan, by way of comparison, which is about two-thirds the size of Colombia, is the world's largest producer of heroin, with over 100,000 acres of its approximately 150,000 acres of arable land, in opium poppies. Since the Taliban have controlled most of Afghanistan, opium production has increased approximately 20-23% per year. Afghanistan also is a major source of hashish. The CIA Factbook notes that "major political factions in the country profit from drug trade."
The London Telegraph today has a lead article in which it reports that the United Nations is asking for millions in aid to keep the Afghans from starving. At the risk of sounding callous, it seems to me that a nation that puts 2/3rds of its limited arable land into growing opium poppies instead of wheat for its people to eat needs to redirect its resources. The people grow opium poppies to help the Taliban underwrite the costs of its worldwide terrorist campaign and the rest of the world is supposed to be responsible for feeding them?
It is increasingly obvious that if President Bush is serious about getting rid of the terrorists by drying up their money sources that the best place to start is to get rid of their cocaine, heroin, hashish and marijuana production. A great deal has been written over the years about the drugs that were brought into Arkansas during the years that Bill Clinton was its governor. In fact, Clinton biographer Roger Morris in his "Partners in Power - The Clintons and Their America, states that drug smuggler Barry Seals, in the years between 1982 and 1986 when he was assassinated::
"In one brazen act ...brought drug cartel kingpin Jorge Ochoa to Arkansas to show off his operation. In the years that Seal's traffic was based in Mena it brought tons of cocaine and heroin to American cities, affecting an incalculable number of lives. A partial estimate, Louisiana's attorney general informed Attorney General Edwin Meese in 1986, suggested that Seal had 'smuggled [drugs worth] between $3 billion and $5 billion into the U.S.'"
And, Barry Seals was only ONE of many smugglers who is or has brought drugs into the United States. This is a multi-billion dollar, worldwide industry. Who was it that laundered the money Barry Seals was generating in Arkansas? Morris wrote:
"Only relatively small change from the [drug] traffic spilled into Western Arkansas, though with resounding impact. Secretaries at Intermountain Regional Airport later told an IRS agent that, after some Seal flights, 'there would be stacks of cash to be taken to the bank and laundered.' Couriers were told to buy cashier's checks, each just under $10,000 to avoid federal reporting. 'The bank officer went down the teller lines,' is how one witness described what happened when an airport employee brought a bag of money into a nearby bank, 'handing out the stacks of $1,000 bills and got the cashier's checks.'"For years Mena buzzed with stories of shoeboxes and suitcases stuffed with cash. In 1982-83, according to IRS and state police calculations, hundreds of thousands washed through local banks, a minor fraction of the profits taken from Seal's Mena runs (most of the money was laundered elsewhere.)"
Well, of course. It would have to be laundered elsewhere. Most of the drugs were sold in America's big cities. There's not enough money in all of Arkansas to purchase a billion dollars worth of illegal drugs.
The obvious question, of course, how could that kind of operation be maintained in full view of the Arkansas police and the Federal law enforcement agencies. Of course, it is said, it was because the CIA was involved with it and was using Mena as a part of a gun-running operation to overthrow the communist Sandinista regime in Nicaragua.
While the CIA and other intelligence agencies "routinely denied responsibility for Seal and Mena," Morris wrote, "security for the operation was generally careless; cover-up from Arkansas to Washington seemed taken for granted. There was a paper trail of federal aircraft registrations and outfittings. Air America, Inc. had previously owned some of Seal's fleet, which included a Lear jet, helicopters and former US military transports,, widely reported to be a CIA proprietary company. ...Between March and December 1982, according to law enforcement records, Seal fitted nine of his aircraft with the latest electronic equipment, paying the $750,000 bill in cash."
That kind of operation, going on in full view of the Arkansas political hierarchy, headed by Bill Clinton, involves more than just a few people. It involves a lot of money that has never been taxed. And, a lot of that money was used in politics in Arkansas.
And that, of course, led to 8 years of Bill Clinton in the White House where known drug kingpins were invited to attend key White House functions. A book was written on that situation too by former FBI agent Gary Aldrich who was appalled at what he saw coming into the White House when the Clintons arrived. He wrote:
"One only had to look at Clinton associates like Little Rock businessman Dan Lasater, who was convicted of cocaine distribution (and later pardoned by then-Governor Clinton) and whose former business partner is current (1996) Clinton director of White House Management and Administration Patsy Thomasson (responsible for drug testing at the White House) or at the cocaine distribution conviction of Clinton's half brother or of Surgeon General Joycelyn Elder's son to get a hint of possible murky depths."...Clinton staffers, older or younger, made no apology for their illegal drug use, which was more extensive and included many 'heavy' drugs like cocaine, crack, LSD and met amphetamine. Many were 'in your face' about it, using the FBI interview to try to debate me on the merits of making drugs legal. Of course, when I asked them how they obtained their drugs, the lies began."
The bottom line in all this is relatively simple. If America really wants to get rid of terrorists, it will get rid of the illegal drug trade. If it really wants to get rid of drug dealers, it will demand that existing laws be enforced. It will demand much harsher penalties than a slap on the wrist and a Presidential pardon that we've seen in the recent past.
Singapore, once the most corrupt and crime ridden city in the world is pretty much devoid of both drugs and crime. How did they do it? My son Gary, who is often in China on business as a Shao-Lin instructor, tells me that visitors on planes arriving from America or Europe are politely told that the laws of Singapore are such that, if they are found with illegal drugs they will be executed. On the other hand, if the women on board the plane want to walk somewhere at night on in Singapore, they will be safe, unlike in American cities.
Of course, Americans are often horrified. What if they are innocent? What if someone PLANTED the drugs on them! Why, it would be unjust to execute them, wouldn't it? Gary observes that if ALL the people caught with drugs and executed in Singapore each year were innocent that there would be far fewer innocent people killed than are killed each year in Atlanta due to drugs and the resulting crime.
President Bush tells us that those who are not FOR getting rid of the terrorists are FOR the Terrorists. An extension of that will inevitably be, those who are not FOR getting rid of the illegal drugs are FOR the drug dealers and terrorism.
To comment: mmostert@bannerofliberty.com
I hope this "logic" doesn't prevail.
I'm out of practice with my "seig heils."
" Yes, the War on (Some) Drugs does all that and more." (MrLeRoy). . .
You read selectively, but whatever.
Can only add that it is clear, some people will continue to choose to 'enjoy'. . .just hope that with every inhale or snort. . .or needle, that they think of the 'war' YOU mention. . .and all those who participate in that war.
. . . because those who 'indulge'. . .share with the good, bad and ugly; share with each and every one, the 'fruits' of their labors. . . and the spilling of their blood. . .
. . .and by their choices, they share the responsibility as well.
. . .and by their choices, they share the responsibility as well.
There, now that's correct.
. . .hard to get anywhere when on the circular path of endless return.
You know, 'been here. . .done that'. . .but enjoy the view.
Become an addict, then.
You write as if you're well on your way.
If you expect a reply from a moderator, you must sign your complaint.
Thank you.
So, if I was growing my own pot, buying it from a neighbor or friend who does, then "I am a link"? Yawn. Try again.
As for legal vs. non. . .have you seen Whitney Houston lately? One talented, but totally wasted human being and Mother of small children. . .and not BECAUSE her drugs are illegal. . .
Whitney Houston is no different than crackman "Bob" who sits on the corner and asks you for change - they both made decisions to use mind-altering substances that they found out they could not handle. Its no different than those who become alcoholics, except that you cant have your life screwed up by the police because you were possessing alcohol. The point you miss is that drugs *are* illegal, and that has not stopped Whitney Houston or your average crack head or heroine addict from getting, wanting or using the drugs they want.
What the illegality has done, though, is harm the lives of peaceful, recreational users(generally pot, LSD or cocain users) who have never committed any crimes other than violating "edicts of government".
Our society/government does not punish possession of alcohol or even abuse of alcohol when it leads to exponentially more deaths than all "illegal" drugs combined. Yet, the mere possession of a bud from a plant(actually even stems or seeds) that grows wild throughout the world is so evil that one must go to jail. Possession of more than 20 grams is a felony meaning prison time. Enough plants, and you can get 30 to life. All for a damn plant. I dont just limit this to marijuana - possession of any amount of cocain is a felony, same with heroine and meth, I believe.
Howabout this: If you dont want to do drugs or alcohol, you dont do them. If I dont want to, I wont either. If you and I have kids, we have every right to teach them not to do harmful things. When they are 18, they are adults and make their own choices, no matter how much a parent may not like it. No more "stop drugs for the children". All children turn into adults. All adults can make their own choices. It is the parent's responsibility to teach their kids not to do drugs. Adults doing "drugs" is no different than adults drinking alcohol.
And thank you, Mr. Mackey.
"Um, drugs are bad..."
I think you're talking about anorexia, not drug use.
No, I am tallking about her long-time addiction to hard drugs.
Either she's taking a pro-anorexia drug, or you're lumping the ills of anorexia together with the problems of drug use.
Look at a recent photo of her. If you're suggesting that her current physique is due to drugs, and NOT anorexia, I fear you're poorly informed (as you are about where the drugs come from).
Ah, but it's not circular---it's an ascending spiral of growing awareness of this fact: the War on (Some) Drugs forcibly imposes on people no less harm than drug users voluntarily impose on themselves.
I HATE those 'edicts of government. . .really. ( Have thought about taking up smoking; the now barely legal smoking. . .just to make my anti-government statement. . .) but should the 'edict' change, then all those who have heretofore been frustrated can be happy.
I do feel sorry about those peaceful. . . recreational users, who mean no harm; who do not venture out, driving anyway; who have no children to show that flauting the law is rewarding. . .and can smoke/dope and earn a living; but they are not 'entitled to a drug induced heaven' either; and would bet that the 'harm' that has come into their lives in total; is small, compared to the 'harm done' and experienced by multitudes on our planet.
In the meantime, do we not have enough problems in our culture WITH alcohol? Why add, legal drug use/abuse?
But alcohol, I surely do enjoy; and all the more so, because it does not by necessity come with the garbage and associative 'karma' that goes with illegal drugs. Actually, do not consider the 'sixties' part of the 'karma' because. . .'who knew' anything?
Alcohol has been both alternatively, legal, illegal. . .legal; but hypocritically so, given that our western civilization is co-entwined with Judeo/Christian history; or just the opposite. . .but a history, from 'whence we came' - and our values - that had a cultural appreciation of 'alcohol'. (No reason to debate here, the origins of ancient or 'old medicants; the 'tonics' once enjoyed. . .or even original coca-cola); and while those ancient cultures had an appreciation of their 'drink'; they did not appreciate the 'drunkard'. Think we can reasonably accept, as well, those 'edicts' regarding individual actions that result from the over use/abuse of alcohol. . .particularly since the addition of five-lane highways and 'super cars'.
Believe we, as a society, can at the same time, and without the hypocritical, anti-alcohol 'Prohibition', say 'NO' to legalizing drugs if ONLY from a 'safety/protection' standpoint. . .Back to our highways and with consideration to our railways and skyways as well - we are surely, more easily alerted to someone who has suffered too much 'drink'. A human condition far more evident than dulled senses from a warm/happy high. . .
In any event, for the time being, if you really value and appreciate your freedom, why choose to feel 'less free'. . .feel the restrictions of where and how; feel threat of the law, should you come to attention?
Why choose to experience LESS freedom in your life or it's exact opposite by your indulging in those recreations that impose unacceptable infringements upon you.
But of course, it is your choice and you are still free to make it; you might just check to see how much real freedom you are allowing yourself. . . or depriving yourself of. . .to enjoy your choices.
You might consider the Freedom you risk as well.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.