How The Cocaine Importing Agency – Just Say’s Yes to Drugs

How The Cocaine Importing Agency – Just Say’s Yes to Drugs

www.darkpolitricks.com
By Dark Politricks

Apparently this video is an attempt to warn kids off drugs. It’s a Romanian anti-drugs campaign that makes out that when you’re high, everyone, and everything, is a fit babe wanting to get it on with you. Only if you are not stoned do you get the brush off. In that case I reckon a lot of kids will be toking after watching this video.

Now whenever your government tries to warn you from taking drugs you have to realise how totally hypocritical this is.

Historical fact, real reporting, basic statistics and admissions from people involved in the drug game has shown that Western Governments from the US to UK and many others, have been deeply involved in drug dealing for many years. From the Opium wars between the British Empire and China, when China wanted to put an end to the epidemic of addicts related to Britain’s importation of the drug hundreds of years ago, something Chinese students are still taught about, to the history of the CIA and their drug dealing activities to fund covert operations. It still goes on to this day.

If you want to read a detailed 4 part report on how the CIA (Cocaine Importation Agency) have been dealing in coke, and Heroin for years now, this is part 1 of the article. It even has an interview with a Burmese man who used to be the biggest heroin dealer in the world. A reporter managed to get an interview with him and he apparently claimed that the CIA were his best customers!

The series covers everything from World War II and the creation of the agency to Air America, Barry Seal, Mena Airport, The Contra’s, Pablo Escobar and the CIA dumping LA into the midst of a crack epidemic.

The Los Angeles black community attempted to sue the US government once a journalist (now dead of course), broke the story about the CIA protecting Freeway Rick Ross from the LA cops so that he could sell their crack, only for it to be thrown out of court on the grounds of National Security. Yes CIA drug dealing is National Security it seems. You can watch an interview with him below.

The journalist who broke the story, Gary Webb, was found shot dead with 2 gun shots to his head. Guess what it was ruled a suicide. It seems a lot of people involved in uncovering devious exploits by the powers that be are found to commit suicide this way.

They have to get their money for their black ops from somewhere and we don’t want Congress or anyone sticking their nose into their dodgy dealings do we? Therefore the CIA seem to have found the perfect way to fund their “off book activities” with drug dealing it seems. Plus they seem to be very keen to protect their sources and bump them off when they become a risk to exposure.

If you think Barry Seal was shot for ratting out the head of the Medellin Cartel, Pablo Escobar, then think again. This is a video about the famous CIA pilot who used to bring guns down to the Nicaraguan rebels for Ronald Reagan and Col. Oliver North, and drugs back up to the states for the CIA to sell.

Not only was he shot on the same night as Pablo’s second in command but other cartel members were also killed on the same night. It doesn’t exactly seem like a revenge killing by the cartel when members are being killed all over the place. It seems more like some CIA “house cleaning”. I’ll let MadCowProd’s Daniel Hopsicker explain it to you along with the new cover up “Mena” movie, starring Tom Cruise, all about Barry Seal’s life.

The four part series on CIA drug smuggling should probably be updated to include the recent explosion of Mexican cartels.

Mexico used to be just a transit point from South America but is now a top level narco state where the Government, Police and Army are indistinguishable from the head chopping cartel members.

When the top bosses of certain cartels manage to escape from maximum security prisons like El Chapo, head of the Sinaloa Cartel, who has managed to break out of two maximum security prisons twice now. You have to ask how come he wasn’t extradited to the USA like so many drug importers of the past?

It does seem odd how some Mexican and Columbian cartel heads get extradited to the US to spend the rest of their lives in shackles in maximum security prisons whereas others get a chance to spend their time in their homeland where even maximum security jails can be broken out of easily. I am reminded of the Netflix series Narcos where even Pablo Escobar got to design and build his own prison until he got tired of the parties and prostitutes and went on the run.

So either El Chapo is protected by the CIA/DEA for informing on other cartels or he has far too much information to spill that would embarrass the USA and Mexican authorities. I wouldn’t be surprised if he ended up in a Sicario film ending sometime soon.

We all know about the Fast and Furious debacle that the DEA allow certain cartels to keep control of areas in Mexico as long as they didn’t start a drugs war with other gangs.

A top Mexican newspaper, El Universal, concluded that the DEA entered into agreements going back to 2000 and continuing through to 2012 with Mexico’s largest drug trafficking gang, the Sinaloa Cartel. Yes the one that expert prison breaker El Chapo is head of. I wonder if the DEA helped him escape or just intervened to prevent his extradition to the US where escape would have been impossible?

According to Jesus Vicente Zambada-Niebla, a highly placed member of the Sinaloa cartel and the son of top Sinaloa leader Ismael “El Mayo” Zambada, the deal involved the cartel providing information about rival Mexican drug gangs to the DEA in exchange for the U.S. government agreeing not to interfere with Sinaloa shipments into the United States and the dismissal of criminal charges against cartel participants. This seems to fit the hypothesis about letting El Chapo remain in Mexico where he could escape from any prison he wanted to. It seems very likely therefore that he is indeed involved with the DEA and other US agencies in some way or another.

So when your government tells you to “Just Say No”, just remember that they “Just Say Yes”, to all the money they can make from bringing in Heroin from Afghanistan on NATO planes and Cocaine from South America. When “ex” CIA planes are found in the jungle with tons of of coke on board then you have to wonder whether they were really decommissioned and sold to drug dealers or just kept on as black op planes all along.

CIA plane found crashed with millions of dollars of Cocaine on board within the Mexican jungle

This plane was a Florida based Gulfstream II jet aircraft that crash landed on September 24, 2007 after it ran out of fuel over Mexico’s Yucatan Peninsula. It had 3.7 tons of Cocaine on board and documents have revealed links between this Cocaine Smuggling Gulfstream II jet aircraft # N987SA and the CIA, who used it on at least 3 rendition flights from Europe and the USA, to bring inmates to Guantanamo’s torture chambers in the early 2000’s.

Strangely the planes drug cargo shrunk from a first reported 6 Tons of Cocaine as well as one ton of pure Heroin to a later reduced figure of only 3.3 tons of Cocaine. I wonder where all this missing Coke and Smack went?

Here is a video that goes into some detail about the plane crash and it’s links to the DEA and CIA.

And then there is the more recent narco state and war in Afghanistan. Don’t be fooled by claims from our ex PM, Tony Blair, that we went to war in Afghanistan to stop the opium production spiralling out of control.

If anything we went to war to keep it going as the Taliban had managed to reduce it to almost zero. Then we went into the country and BOOM, the harvest size increased year by year.

Not only do 92% of the countries population not even know what 9.11 was – surprising seeing it was the event that caused the devastation of their country – but since the CIA took the Taliban out of power the Opium crop has just grown and grown.

As you can see from the graph in 2001 when the Taliban ruled the country they actually banned the production of Opium as un-Islamic and its harvest dropped to hardly anything. Also after 9.11 and the invasion of the country the opium production spiked once again and has increased year after year thereon.

Remember this was the drug that the CIA had increased production of, during the 80’s, when Russian had invaded the country. The aim was to both demoralise the Soviet troops as well as pay for the training and arming of what was to become al-Qaeda, the then called Mujahideen.

Because the US wanted to supply the Mujahideen rebels in Afghanistan with stinger missiles and other military hardware it needed the full cooperation of Pakistan. By the mid-1980s, the CIA operation in Islamabad was one of the largest US intelligence stations in the World. `If BCCI is such an embarrassment to the US that forthright investigations are not being pursued it has a lot to do with the blind eye the US turned to the heroin trafficking in Pakistan’, said a US intelligence officer. (“The Dirtiest Bank of All,” Time, July 29, 1991, p. 22.)

The Pakistan-Afghanistan borderlands became the world’s top heroin producer, supplying 60 per cent of U.S. demand. In Pakistan, the heroin-addict population went from near zero in 1979 to 1.2 million by 1985, a much steeper rise than in any other nation.

CIA assets again controlled this heroin trade. As the Mujahideen guerrillas seized territory inside Afghanistan, they ordered peasants to plant opium as a revolutionary tax. Across the border in Pakistan, Afghan leaders and local syndicates under the protection of Pakistan Intelligence operated hundreds of heroin laboratories. During this decade of wide-open drug-dealing, the U.S. Drug Enforcement Agency in Islamabad failed to instigate major seizures or arrests.

Source – The Spoils of War

Another side effect of the CIA’s support of the Islamic Mujahideen to fight the USSR was that they created al-Qaeda. Here is ex UK foreign minister Robin Cook admitting that the USA and the CIA created al-Qaeda (or “the Database”) of jihadists that the Americans used to fight the Russians during that war, and then afterwards as many claim, were used to de-stabilise areas that the US wanted to control (e.g Gladio 2). Also lest anyone forget, the most gagged woman in US history, FBI agent, Sibel Edmonds, claimed after 9-11 that bin-Laden had maintained very close links with the CIA right up until the attacks in the US.

So not only does Afghanistan now produce over 92% of all opium in the world, but they no longer just export it to be turned into heroin in other countries, they now make the heroin inside their borders. It is then transported north to Russia, south to Pakistan and west to Iran, where it makes its way to Turkey and then Europe. That is if it isn’t fast tracked on a NATO plane for special delivery.

So kids when your government tells you to “Just Say No” to drugs, just be aware that they are in fact controlling multiple countries production of the very drugs you consume.

On top of that they are pulling the strings of the major cartels and king pins who bring these drugs into your country.

Hypocritical – yes, surprising not at all.

View the original article at www.darkpolitricks.com.

By Dark Politricks

© 2015 By Dark Politricks

End The War on Drugs – Russell Brand’s Documentary

Russell Brand End The Drugs War

YouTube.com
By Dark Politricks

As someone who has been around drugs all my life in the UK it is interesting to see different people’s perspectives on drugs.

You can read my own thoughts on drugs and the war on it here: The Drug Laws Need Re-Thinking.

If you know my history and my current conitions then you will know I am on Fentanyl for my chrionic pain condition, a drug 100 * stronger than Morphine and many times more potent than heroin. It’s a drug that they cut heroin with and has caused many deaths in the USA.

I am not committing a crime by taking this strong opiate because I am being prescribed it by my GP for my pain.

It’s given to me in patches I stick on my body where the drug is slowly absorbed over 2 days . It’s supposed to be 3 days but I am on the highest dose and the GP has overruled NICE rules on medications due to the severity of my condition.

When I go to the chemist to collect my supply they have to get it from the Controled Drugs Supply where I then sign an extra part of the form. It is a strong drug, one that I was told by a girl I met who worked at a homeless centre when I was in iceland (where heroin wasn’t available) that if I threw one of my patches into the middle of a crowd of homeless addicts they would fight to the death over it. Apparently due to the lack of heroin any Icelandic addict would cook these patches up, extract the Fentanyl and then inject or smoke it.

Basically though it doesn’t touch the sides on me and I get no buzz at all from taking it through a patch. This is probably why I am prescribed the maximum amount and over 2 not 3 days plus other prescribed pain killers, and of course taking other strong drugs as well to ease the pain.

For me to be on a drug that is legal because a GP gave it to me and for another person to be a criminal for using it because they bought it off me in the streets is madness in my mind.

Why is it ok to take a mind and body altering drug when it is supplied by the “system” but not when you buy it to take it for recreational purposes.

Why is it okay to ease the pain of the body but not of the mind?

You can see how the Goverments involved in cracking down doors in the morning and locking up junkies are two faced by the way they keep the drugs flowing.

From Vietnam and the Golden Triangle, Columbia and Mexico and their own internal wars and to Afghanistan where opium and now Heroin production has increased hugely since the most recent war started.

Let’s not forget that it was US policy to let Opium be grown in Afghanistan when the Soviets were at war in the same country 30 years ago to get their soldiers addicted and demoralise them as well as use the funds from the sales to pay for weapons for what is now al-Qaeda.

You can read all about the CIA’s involvment in the production and selling of drugs in this 4 part article and the most amazing quote comes from the biggest heroin producer in the 1980’s from Burma, Khun Sa, who when interviewed claimed that the the CIA were one of his best customers.

“by 1986 he was refining 80 percent of the opium harvest in the Golden Triangle. The king of opium trade, Khun Sa had risen to become the world’s largest single heroin trafficker by controlling 60 percent of the world’s illicit opium supply.”

“In 1986, Bo Gritz went to Burma with White House approval to meet with Khun Sa who supposedly had information on American MIAs. Khun Sa said that he wanted to end the opium and heroin traffic in his territory and to expose American officials involved in the drug smuggling. Gritz claimed that he took this message to the United States government and was told by Tom Harvey of the National Security Council that “there is no interest here” in the Khun Sa overture. Gritz had in his possession 40 hours of video tape of Khun Sa who “charged American officials, both past and present, with being the chief buyers of drugs produced in that part of the world.” He also claimed that he wanted to stop drug trafficking, but that the United States government would not let him. Khun Sa said that the CIA were some of his best customers. He offered support to the DEA to alert them of drug movements, but this was rejected at the headquarters level.”

For more information about the CIA’s involvement in drug smuggling please read the following articles:

http://www.darkpolitricks.com/cia-involvement-in-drug-smuggling-part-1

http://www.darkpolitricks.com/cia-involvement-in-drug-smuggling-part-2

http://www.darkpolitricks.com/cia-involvement-in-drug-smuggling-part-3

http://www.darkpolitricks.com/cia-involvement-in-drug-smuggling-part-4

You might aready know that the rulers of our world have no interest in stopping the war on drugs just like they have no interest in stopping the war on terror.

They are benefiting from it.

They are earning good money from the misery of others and it just shows what kind of people we are being controlled by when they would rather make another billion to add to their existing hundreds than stop people living in squalour taking heroin to ease the pain of the existence these overlords have created for them.

What a world.

As I sit here and write this I am watching Russell Brand’s documentary on the war on drugs on BBC3.

He is an ex addict and I recommned reading his book Revolution at the same time.

It discusses the fact that we are all tring to escape reality because reality is so crap.

As some ex addict says “Drugs and Drink are the answer to reality” – It’s true. When reality is so crap that it doesn’t give you anything more than cheap consumerism, materialism, banksterism and a lack of jobs and free training for people who want it. Why wouldn’t you want to escape it by going up the pub, taking drugs, watching TV or other mind numbing activities.

I suggest you watch his documentary as he interviews politiicans, goes on drug raids, speaks to addicts and politiicans and visits drug clinics in Switzerland where people are allowed to bang up and smoke crack.

Russel Brand – End The Drugs War

This is the blurb above the video on YouTube.com.

Russell Brand: End the Drugs War BBC Full Documentary 2014

The documentary Russell Brand made for BBC Three in 2012 concluded with him giving evidence to the Home Affairs Select Committee. Drawing on his own experience of drug taking and recovery, he advocated treating addiction as a health issue rather than a criminal problem and underlined his own belief that abstinence is the best way to help addicts.

Since then the Committee has reported its findings, concluding that the British drugs laws were failing and that it was a ‘now or never’ moment to reform them. But David Cameron didn’t agree, insisting that the drugs policy is working in Britain and that we should ‘stick at it’.

In this personal journey for BBC Three, Russell Brand sets out to challenge that point of view. He wants to find out how other countries are tackling their problems of drug abuse and to explore how the framework of criminalization implicit in the ‘war on drugs’ produces enormous harm in the treatment of addicts. Russell believes that ‘a shift’ is happening in the way that people view drug addiction. But to really change things he needs to persuade those who have power.

Russell starts on the frontline of the ‘war on drugs’ by joining the Met Police as they carry out dawn drug raids, and ends up sharing a police cell with a young addict who has been in and out of prison since she began taking drugs aged 12. He witnesses the dangers of street addiction in Birmingham, but is as shocked by what he sees in the legal ‘drug-consumption room’ he visits in Berne, capital of conservative Switzerland.

At a drug recovery conference, Russell is drawn into an argument about abstinence versus government methadone programmes, but also finds an unlikely ally for his campaign in a Tory lord. At a UN drugs conference in Vienna he meets the politician who in 2001 decriminalized drugs in Portugal. What Russell discovers from him informs his impassioned plea at the end of the conference that drugs should be decriminalized.

As he takes his argument public, Russell finds his views are challenged by those who say that the public fear that lifting criminalization will also lift drug use. But a second encounter with the young addict he met during the Met drug raid (who, since then, has been in prison, been released and is back on drugs) bolsters his belief.

Russell meets the deputy prime minister, Nick Clegg, who surprises him by agreeing in principle that the ‘war on drugs’ is futile and unsuccessful, but then frustrates him by explaining the lack of political will to move forward quickly to change things for the better.

Presenter Russell Brand
Executive Producer Liz Hartford
Producer Ross Wilson
Director Ross Wilson
Production Company Matchlight Ltd

View the original video at YouTube.com.

View the original article on the main site Russell Brand End The Drugs War – By Dark Politricks

After the shutting down of Silk Road who will pop up to take it’s place?

After the shutting down of Silk Road who will pop up to take it’s place?

By Dark Politricks

Recently we have had the shut down of the online darknet Silk Road website.

Apparently the man behind it, Ross Ulbricht, was found with bitcoins worth $3.6m (£2.2m) when the FBI raided him.

What we need is a proper “DarkNet search engine”.

The problem is once it was created everyone would be on it and it wouldn’t be dark anymore.

However a program, downloaded to the users computer like P2P software, that crawled behind the scenes to find “dark” sites from links on certain messageboards and other “known dark site” locations could be made instead.

Just like the NSA and their own super Google, we need a way to quickly make a local search engine on the users PC of encrypted files that when ran locally acted like a search engine.

No public domain, no WHOIS records, just a way to obtain the software and  download it to your PC and run it locally.

The website would be local to your PC so no log files and just return sites from a local search engine – your own personal naughty Google.

Obviously you would use TOR like software or proxies to make all HTTP requests – but then you would be doing that anyway if you had half a brain. Maybe you would need to prove yourself first before downloading it – maybe after a criminal record check to ensure you ARE a criminal!

Maybe I might just build my own one for a test and see how it goes. I did manage to make a similar piece of software called Proxy Hunter that goes off and finds proxies from any website, decodes the source using various methods, tests and then stores the Proxies on demand for use if required. Works a charm.

This could be a good programming challenge! Who will take it up!

Remember people.

Crawling the web is NOT illegal, sending drugs over state or country borders is!

Whether drugs should be legalised altogether is another question!

However what I cannot believe is why the doofus behind the site used an email address with his name in it?

Had he never heard of disposable email addresses?

All it seems to take is one mistake by an idiot criminal not thinking ahead far enough and then a few years later – bang – 6 o’clock knock by the old bill (or FBI in his case).

Lets see what pops up in it’s place.

Just like a drugs gang, when one gets shut down, ten new ones open in their place.

If any of you have any links, messaboards that point to such links, or known front ends to such dark sites, then please forward them (email or comment) on so I can help write this crawler.

It will be an interesting challenge but obviously I don’t want to crawl google but instead know hubs and maybe “submitted” links. Proxy front ends for Pirate Bay, new Silk Roads, alternative news sites that appear no-where in Google and other sites that would be of “interest” to certain people.

 

View the original article After the shutting down of Silk Road who will pop up to take it’s place? at darkpolitricks.com

England and Wales Stop and Search Consultation – Let the Government know what you think!

England and Wales Stop and Search Consultation – Let the Government know what you think!

By Dark Politricks

The UK government is holding an open consultation with the public over their thoughts on the controversial stop and search powers that are used (and abused) by the Police.

As anyone who knows stop and search can be a humiliating experience. You are prevented from going along your way, frisked and even strip searched (as I have in a pub toilet) and basically treated like a criminal even if you haven’t done anything wrong.

Anyone who knows the statistics of stop and search realises that the most likely people to be stopped are black young males, or people of colour and youths.

“But they commit the crime” you might say, and you might be right in that some statistical studies show that in poorer neighbourhoods the majority of criminals fit those profiles.

However it is more likely that wealth and social factors are to play when it comes down to whether or not someone is a criminal and as the recent banking crisis shows, if you are a super rich, high flying, banker who robs billions from the country then you are not even likely to be convicted let alone stopped or searched!

Therefore if you are an uneducated poor working class male, coloured or not, you are more likely to live in areas of high crime, be drawn into gang culture or just stopped by the police due to your postcode.

A recent article in the Guardian has this to say when the current Home Secretary spoke at the Police Superintendents’ Association of England and Wales.

Theresa May has warned the police that improper use of their stop-and-search powers can cause immense resentment and undermine public co-operation.

The home secretary said: “I do not have to tell you how important it is that public confidence in the police is maintained. And it simply cannot be maintained if people think that senior police officers are lacking in integrity or behaving in a self-serving way – or if, on the street, your constables are being rude and disrespectful to the public.”

Her speech, to the Police Superintendents’ Association of England and Wales conference, marks May’s strongest language yet in her campaign to scale back the “waste of time” involved in the 1.2m searches carried out by the police on the street every year. She has said that the resulting arrest rate, which can be as little as 3% in some areas, is “far too low for comfort”.

But, significantly, the home secretary also praised the police for their capacity to deliver despite having suffered a 20% cut in their Whitehall funding. She even called them “the model public service”, in sharp contrast to her previous description of them as “the last unreformed public service”.

“You have cut crime with fewer officers and lower budgets,” May said. “You are doing more with less. That makes you the model public service in the era of budget cuts.”

The home secretary told the superintendents that stop and search could be an invaluable tool for reducing crime, particularly knife crime; if used properly and fairly, the tactic worked very effectively.

She added, however: “But the caveat is vital: it works if it is used properly and fairly. Stop and search has the potential to cause immense resentment and honesty to the police, with all the implications that has for generating distrust and ending co-operation from the public, if it is not used fairly.”

You can let the Government know what you think about the stop and search powers the police currently have and how they could be changed in a public consultation they are having at www.gov.uk. Currently the Police must have reasonable suspicion that you have or are about to commit a crime before stopping you or that you are carrying weapons or drugs. As the government consultation page says.

This consultation seeks views on the police powers of stop and search, specifically under the following legislation:

• section 1 of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 (PACE)
• section 23 of the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971
• section 60 of the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994

It concerns those powers used in relation to street crime, burglary, antisocial behaviour, and public order offences such as riots and violent protests.

The aim of the consultation is to understand how the public and those involved in policing view the use of these powers. Stop and search powers under counter-terrorism legislation have been the subject of recent changes and are not within the scope of this consultation.

You can read the full documentation by downloading the following relevant link.

Consultation on police powers of stop and search

Consultation on police powers of stop and search: Welsh version

The consultation period has been extended and now runs until 24 September 2013. So we have more time to let the police and the UK government know that we want the Labour police state rolled back as much as possible and that anti-terrorism laws shouldn’t be abused by stopping tourists taking photos or other spurious reasons for detaining people.

How to respond

You can send your comments using the governments online form.Or you can email your response to: Stopandsearch@homeoffice.gsi.gov.uk

Or if you’re still stuck in the paper and stamp era, write to:

Stop and search consultation
Home Office
Police Transparency Unit
6th Floor Fry Building
2 Marsham Street
London, SW1P 4DF

View the UK Governments consultation page at www.gov.uk.

 

View the original article on my main site www.darkpolitricks.com

The choice, a dead journalist or a fake one?

The choice, a dead journalist or a fake one?

By Dark Politricks

It seems that 2013 has been the year that the Empire finally threw away any semblance of liberty and free speech and decided to go for broke in its attack on all those who dare speak truth to power. They sure have been cranking the screws on anyone who speaks out against them in the last few months.

This week we had, David Miranda, the partner of Glenn Greenwald who broke the Edward Snowden story held under anti terrorism laws at Heathrow airport.

Once again this is another abuse of this law by the UK government which follows it’s mis-use a few years back when it was used to freeze Icelandic bank accounts. Oh and of course there was the Blair governments arrest of the 82-year-old anti Iraq war protestor Walter Wolfgang who was dragged out of the Labour conference for heckling Jack Straw.

Plus our new anti terrorism acts (2000 and 2006) have been used to detain arrestees for up to 28 days without charge, restricted the right to protest and limited free speech in many areas all whilst giving our police new powers to stop and search people they think “could be” terrorists. These groups mainly consist of people who take photographs of policemen or London landmarks, or it seems the partners of journalists breaking stories on illegal surveillance by the state.

It seems the UK’s implementation of anti terrorism laws has been used more to chill dissent and increase the polices power to abuse due process rather than to attack true terrorists. How hypocritical it is that we attack whistleblowers and journalists whilst fund and support al-Nusra Front jihadists and al-Qaeda linked LIFG rebels in our game of chess in the Middle East.

It shames me to be a Brit when we suck up to the USA in this way.

It seems we are so desperate for American money to keep the cogs running in our GCHQ super computers that we will bend over backwards anyway possible to help the US attack their own “domestic extremists”. We will do anything from detaining and robbing the partners of reporters who break stories on massive NSA surveillance or manning a 24 siege of the building in which another whistleblower who wants to claim asylum is hiding out.

I wouldn’t be surprised if I woke up tomorrow and heard on the news that David Cameron had authorised a drone strike on the Ecuadorian embassy and killed Julian Assange.

It sure would make the COINTELPRO littered US “press” happy to hear of his death. A certain Michael Grunwald would certainly love to write that particular obituary.

Again the Terrorism Act from 2000 was used to detain Glenn Greenwalds partner, a dubious use of the law at the very least and one which Glenn promises revenge on the UK government. I don’t doubt he has many more secrets about the cosy affair between GCHQ and the NSA to reveal but he surely must be worried about the climate which now surrounds any journalist willing to go head to head with the beast.

Would the USA stoop to such levels as to actually dispatch with pesky journalists who reveal state secrets from whistleblowers?

Some people already believe this has been the case for years.

Recently we had the mysterious death of Michael Hastings who died in a mysterious car crash after going on the run due to fears he had about a story he was working on.  Apparently top US Army officials told the Rolling Stone journalist that he would be hunted down and killed over his story that lead to General McChrystal’s downfall and he was apparently working on a massive story concerning the CIA. This was all before he warned friends he had to go off the radar due to worries about his safety and then surprisingly his car exploded in an unusual accident.

With recent revelations that DARPA or anyone else with the skills can hack into computers on board cars nowadays it doesn’t seem so far-fetched to believe he was taken out by some agency annoyed with his work. With computers controlling everything from dishwashers to cars and with NSA/GCHQ super computers able to pinpoint phones and GPS co-ordinates in real-time it wouldn’t take a genius in this day and age with the right software to do some damage with a few keystrokes.

Got a webcam on your PC? Well just hope it’s just your friends watching your pretty face from afar and not an NSA nerd or even your local school!

Then there was the case of Gary Webb who was found dead in an apparent suicide in 2000 apparently from “multiple gun shots to the head”, an common way to kill yourself it seems for journalists and whistleblowers.

Gary Webb was the reporter who had famously broke the story about the CIA running guns to the Contra’s and drugs back to the states. It was the CIA’s coke that started the Los Angeles crack wars in the 80’s and made a certain CIA owned drug dealer Ricky “Freeway Ricky” Ross very rich. It was his story that led to the black community and the NAACP trying to get congressional hearings held into the allegations.

Bary Seal, one of the CIA’s drug running pilots was also famously found pumped full of bullets after threatening to expose the same CIA drug running scam that had the Bush families finger prints all over it. Even after his car had been sweeped “clean” by the personal phone number of a certain then Vice President George Herbert Walker Bush was found in his possession!

The Colombian drug dealers convicted of the crime believed they working for a certain Oliver North and the fingerprints that led to the Iran Contra scandal and Mena drug operation that link nearly everyone in the Bush family to Bill Clinton were all over the hit.

So it wouldn’t be a total shock after the history of covert assassinations to hear on the news one day that Glenn Greenwald had been found dead along with his partner David. Probably after a heated argument overhead by an anonymous caller to the police. The official story would be that Glenn was found dead, supposedly having committed suicide after first killing his partner. Of course he would have shot himself three or four times in the head just to make sure of course.

Therefore if I was Glenn I would be slightly wary about waging all out war on the US/US axis of war. Of course he is well within his rights to do so and I wish he brings the whole house down if he possibly can, however it is clear he has been marked by the powers that be.

Co-opted and “owned” mainstream personalities have attacked him and even suggested he be arrested for his work with Edward Snowden.  David Gregory from Meet the Press asked why Glenn shouldn’t be charged with a crime for aiding his source Snowden in revealing NSA secrets and CNBC host Andrew Ross Rokin also suggested that Greenwald should be arrested.

And those are just a few of the debates Glenn is having online with numerous, and obvious, Government paid spokesmen. All these propagandists for the Empire who read from scripts handed to them by the NSA/CIA are not real journalists and their attacks on Glenn just prove that the US media can no longer be trusted to hold anything to account, let alone the Government.

It seems a sad state of affairs when you cannot be considered a real journalist unless you are running in fear from the Government and their partners across the globe. Is it really a choice between breaking a really major story such as the CIA drug smuggling, NSA spying, or US war crimes and then ending up dead, looking for asylum or locked up in a military prison for years?

All the while talking heads get paid millions just to parrot official stories and take the Governments word on everything. It must be hard to look in the mirror when you call yourself a journalist but don’t dare put your head above the parapet.  “Everything’s ok, just keep shopping”, they say as the world burns and the constitution continues to be shredded piece by piece.

What a choice it has become. To be paid millions for toeing the line and having no moral fibre at all, or dare speak truth to power and risk two in the head or a life on the run.

 

View the original article Do you have to be a harassed journalist nowadays to be considered a real one? at darkpolitricks.com

What makes Presidents break all their promises once they get elected?

What happens to new Presidents to make them break all their campaign pledges?

By Dark Politricks

I’ve always thought that when a new President was elected that on their inauguration day, after all the celebrations, they were then taken into a special room within the White House.

In this room they would be shown tape recordings, videos, signed affidavits from witnesses and other materials that could be used to blackmail them. If at any time during their Presidency they they decided not follow the plans these puppet masters had already planned out for them then these materials would be used to bring them down.

I cannot think of any other reason why so many drunks, drug users, sex addicts and other deviants have been elected as President of the United States in recent years.

The last few Presidents have all had rumours about drugs, gay sex and even murders or drug importation.

People have come out and said that they were involved in sex acts with them, or pilots have recalled seeing the Bush brothers at an airport when dropping off blow after shipping arms down to Central America (Barry Seal).

Even the President’s themselves have admitted to taking drugs (whether they inhaled or not).

Of the latest three Presidents we have the following acts being attibuted to them by various investigators and witnesses. These are all acts that could be used to blackmail them.

• Obama (coke, weed, gay sex, birth certificate, links to Islam)
• George Bush (coke, drink, pot, gay sex in the White House)
• Bill Clinton (coke importer, pot smoker – although he claims he didn’t inhale! Plus a string of dead people behind him, many who committed suicide with two gun shots to the head! And of course all the sexual acts and infidelity)

Lest you think I am being hypocritical I have no problem with drug use, gays or people following Islam (as long as they are not limiting womens rights, chopping hands off or blowing people up due to Allah’s will.) Murder on the other hand or importing drugs is of course another level altogether.

Plus we all know what the members of the secret society Skull n Bones have to do when they get initiated. Members who include many ex Presidents and powerful officials.

Apparently they lie naked in an open coffin and masturbate whilst the other members all stand around them watching and the new inmate recalls every sexual partner they have had. Whether this is true or not (it is a secret society) it would add many more Presidents to this list.

I have said this many times before, especially when it becomes apparent that the new President is going to break every election pledge they had promised the public on the campaign trail.

What happened to all the “hope and change” Obama promised us?

The end to wars, restoring our civil liberties, closing Gitmo, punishing the previous criminal occupants of the White House for their illegal wars and breaches of international treaties on war crime.

The only thing that could explain it is that either Obama just blatantly lied on the campaign trail or he was blackmailed into following a certain neo-con, pro-war, pro-Israeli, anti-civil liberty line once he was elected.

Apparently 3 out of 10 men are homosexual yet there are hardly any openly gay members of Congress. Why is that? Is the Congress somehow different from the rest of society or is it full of people who have hidden lives and risk exposure at any moment by someone with enough power to expose their hypocrisy?

I just got sent this recording of Bill Hicks on Twitter and I think he sums it up perfectly. As I always say – satire and comedy is sometimes the only way reality can be conveyed to the public without getting a bullet in your head for doing so.

View the original article “Are new Presidents blackmailed to make them break all their campaign pledges?” at www.darkpolitricks.com

The hypocrisy of politicians wanting to drug test welfare recipients

By Dark Politricks

So Newt Gingrich is following in the footsteps of state governors and other GOP politicians in calling out for recipients of welfare benefits to be drug tested before they can get any help from the government.

From a recent interview with Yahoo’s Chris Moody:

[MOODY:] Speaking of Ron Paul, at the last debate, he said that the war on drugs has been an utter failure. We’ve spent billions of dollars since President Nixon and we still have rising levels of drug use. Should we continue down the same path given the amount of money we’ve spent? How can we reform our approach?

[GINGRICH:] I think that we need to consider taking more explicit steps to make it expensive to be a drug user. It could be through testing before you get any kind of federal aid. Unemployment compensation, food stamps, you name it.

 

It has always struck me that if you’re serious about trying to stop drug use, then you need to find a way to have a fairly easy approach to it and you need to find a way to be pretty aggressive about insisting–I don’t think actually locking up users is a very good thing. I think finding ways to sanction them and to give them medical help and to get them to detox is a more logical long-term policy.

I have many issues with this tact and the first is that just like junkies, governments always look for short term fixes.

If any government really wanted to get people off drug habits it would cost more money as proper detox and rehabilitation doesn’t come cheap. I have no problem with criminals who offend being offered treatment at proper centers instead of being locked up in prisons as they currently are but once again this will cost money, and as we keep getting told – there just aint any of that around at the moment.

My second point is what happens to any of the millions of kids born each year to people receiving benefits and who is on drugs?

It is not their fault if they are unfortunate enough to be born to parents who have a drug problem so why should they forgo food, money, clothes and any kind of state help?

Yes the parents might already be spending most of their welfare cheques on drugs but removing food from the mouths of children by stopping food stamps? I think that’s totally unfair but then I suppose these people might have other plans for the kids. Maybe we might see the return of Victorian workhouses full of kids stolen from drug users working for nothing. Well it might stimulate the economy if we can reduce worker pay and conditions….

If the government wants to stop drug taking welfare recipients then they are looking in the wrong direction.

I reckon if they piled up the amounts of coke snorted by banksters in the City, Wall Street and every other major financial institution that has recently received bailouts (welfare from us tax payers) and compared it to the amounts of various home made crystal meth, pub coke and other shit quality gear taken by the poorest of society then I think I know which pile would be worth getting stuck into.

The City of London used to run on coke and it got so bad that many firms had to start drug testing many of the workers. I reckon profits probably fell the year they did that but that’s another debate. This is from a Daily Mail article in 2006.

A study by The Rowntree Foundation which found “anecdotal evidence for an increase of drug testing in some high-profile firms, particularly in the financial sector where there are no obvious health or safety justifications.”

One corporate lawyer quoted in the Rowntree Foundation study which reveals growing drug use said: “I have known one company that had a ‘snorting room’ in the City.

“People turn a blind eye with regard to drugs and alcohol – but also with a range of other behaviour – because they don’t want to lose a key employee…someone who can make a lot of money.”

So it’s okay if the person can make the firm a lot of money but if your on your ass living in a squat or some other kind of shit hole literally living hand to mouth having to rely on food stamps to feed yourself. Where a dole cheque would last less than an hour or two if you had a proper banksters coke habit then fuck you. Go and jump off a bridge, and take your kids with you?

Why not, they are just more mouths to feed and in these times of austerity we need to be looking after our “wealth creating” drug takers rather than those useless eaters consuming up tax dollars.

Ron Paul made more than a valid point when he said the war on drugs has failed. Just like the war on terror it was always doomed to fail as you cannot beat something as intangible as the innate desire for a sizable chunk of the world population to want to change their living conditions for a temporary period by taking various substances.

Unless we can make our world a viable utopia in which the need to escape poverty, memories of abuse, lack of hope and the myriad of other reasons that cause people to drink, take drugs, gamble, have sex and any other form of escapist behaviour – we will always have drugs.

Mankind has been getting high for thousands of years and it is not going to stop by “just one more push” and a harder crack down on drug users – especially when if they actually drug tested the whole population and sacked everyone with even a hint of an illegal (or legal) stimulant or downer in their system we would probably have less than half a workforce left.

And not let forget all the politicians. They are welfare recipients as well. We pay their salaries so we deserve to know if they are taking us for a ride by snorting, jacking or nibbling a bean at the weekend.

We have all read the stories about politicians being caught with their pants down stuck in a glory hole after spending their careers denouncing gay people as “ungodly”.

And just as many have been caught with dope after spending far too much time attacking drug users. Just do a search on Google for politicians caught with drugs or with their pants down and find out for yourself the size of the hypocrisy on display.

What is good for the goose is good for the gander and in this case welfare recipients fall in the same category as politicians and many big banks as well as any other company that has been bailed out by taxpayers across the world.

Therefore if we are going to start drug testing we should start at the top and work our way down.

I think if we did that we wouldn’t be hearing so much from certain corners about drugs and sex.

Recent Methadrone deaths show UK Laws are out of date

By Dark Politricks

You may have heard in the news this week that two teenagers in the UK died after a night out which involved using the legal drug Methadrone (M-CAT or miaw miaw). Even though their deaths have not been conclusively linked to the drug the media has once again gone into hyper-drive raising a moral panic almost on the levels of the Acid House parties in the late 80’s.

The two teenagers had apparently not only taken M-CAT but also had been drinking to the early hours as well as taking the heroin substitute Methadone to come down on. Even though the cause of death is more likely to be down to the mixture of drugs especially the dangerous combination of alcohol and opiates the media is behaving like judge and jury and M-CAT has already been found guilty.

There are already cries to ban this currently legal drug which is being sold quite openly as “plant food” openly in shops and on the Internet. Similar in chemical composition to Khat and in behaviour to ecstasy and amphetamines it is just the latest in a line of synthetic drugs created by clever chemists who keep one step ahead of Britain’s antiquated drug laws by changing the chemical signatures ever so slightly as soon as the last product is banned.

We are living in a hypocritical society that allows the worst drugs in terms of deaths to be sold perfectly legally but others that kill minuscule numbers are prohibited. Cigarettes kill over 100,000 people a year and alcohol kills almost the same amount through disease, assaults, accidents and road deaths.  Drugs such as amphetamines and opiates are used in medicine all the time and even ecstasy was used by psychiatrists in the past but how dare anyone decide to take the same drugs for recreational purposes.

People have been taking mind altering substances for thousands of years and will carry on taking them whether they are illegal or not. Prohibition has never worked and only leads to immense profits for drug dealers and deaths due to impurities in the products. If the media has their way and M-CAT is added to the long list of proscribed narcotics then within a month or two another synthetic drug will be on the market to take its place.

As I have previously said we need a totally new approach to drug use in which users are not criminals to be arrested and locked up at great expense. A regulated drug industry could be just what the country needs at the moment as the tax revenue received by taxing products currently used by millions every day would surely help pay off our national deficit.

Addicts should be prescribed their fix by doctors just as they were before 1973 as we have surely proved that trying to treat drug abuse by locking people up in prison hasn’t worked at all. Not only would crime rates fall and addicts get help more easily, the country would benefit through lower insurance premiums and a large proportion of the police force would be freed up to concentrate on serious crime.

The right wing media wouldn’t like it and there would surely be a moral panic generated by the press but if the problem of drugs is ever going to be tackled once and for all then this is the only logical way.  We are currently being governed by children of the 60’s and 70’s who were the first modern generation to properly rebel against the rules that said drugs were bad. Hopefully with the raver generations from the 80’s and 90’s maturing the time will come when the critical mass of right thinking citizens is such that a brave political move to legalise and regulate would not cause the outcry it once would. Hopefully that time is not too far away for just like the war on terror the war on drugs cannot be won by conventional means.

Obama grows the drug war, with enforcement a clear priority

Stephen C. Webster
Raw Story
Wednesday, February 3rd, 2010

It was not long ago when President Barack Obama’s new drug czar, former Seattle police chief Gil Kerlikowske, swept into Washington, D.C. and declared the “drug war” a public policy relic.

The Obama administration, he said, would move toward handling drug addiction as a medical problem, moving away from the brash enforcement tactics that hallmarked prior administrations.

“We’re not at war with people in this country,” Kerlikowske told The Wall Street Journal in May.

However, if the Office of National Drug Control Policy’s (ONDCP) budget for fiscal year 2011 is to be believed, Kerlikowske was full of hot air.

According to 2011 funding “highlights” released by the ONDCP (PDF link), the Obama administration is growing the drug war and tilting its funds heavily toward law enforcement over treatment.

The president’s National Drug Control Budget also continues the Bush administration’s public relations tactic of obscuring the costs of prosecuting and imprisoning drug offenders. “Enron style accounting,” is how drug policy reform advocate Kevin Zeese described it, writing for Alternet in 2002.

The budget places America’s drug war spending at $15.5 billion for fiscal year 2011; an increase of 3.5 percent over FY 2010. That figure reflects a 5.2 percent increase in overall enforcement funding, growing from $9.7 billion in FY 2010 to $9.9 billion in FY 2011. Addiction treatment and preventative measures, however, are budgeted at $5.6 billion for FY 2011, an increase from $5.2 billion in FY 2010.

In short, the Obama administration’s appropriations for treating drug addiction are just short of half that dedicated to prosecuting the war.

A ONDCP press release describes these figures as “balanced.”

“The new budget proposal demonstrates the Obama Administration’s commitment to a balanced and comprehensive drug strategy,” Kerlikowske added, in the advisory. “In a time of tight budgets and fiscal restraint, these new investments are targeted at reducing Americans’ drug use and the substantial costs associated with the health and social consequences of drug abuse.”

“It sure was an encouraging signal when Drug Czar Kerlikowske declared that the ‘war on drugs’ was over shortly after he took the job last year,” commented Tom Angel, spokesman for Law Enforcement Against Prohibition. “But until the budget numbers match up with rhetoric, it looks like the war is still being waged.”

How Weed Won the West: Marijuana Legalization is a Crucial Issue for the Liberty Movement

Kurt Nimmo
Prison Planet.com
Tuesday, February 2, 2010

Jonathan Perri, writing for the Los Angeles Times, declares the war against drugs a dismal failure. Perri mentions an op-ed penned by D.A.R.E. America Chairman Skip Miller who claims his organization has reduced illegal drug usage by America’s children.

One has to ask… what is Mr. Miller smoking?

Perri notes that D.A.R.E. and other such educational programs have in fact not reduced drug use. “But in reality, our drug laws have failed to stop marijuana use among American youth but have succeeded in punishing them with damning criminal records, loss of financial aid for college and removal from after-school activities. As a graduate of D.A.R.E., I know all too well about the shortcomings of this program and of America’s war on marijuana,” writes Perri.

A casual glance at the so-called war on drugs reminds one of Einstein’s famous quip — insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. Arresting and throwing recreational drug users in prison — primarily for possessing and smoking marijuana — will not win the supposed war. It simply creates a class of criminals where none existed before.

In fact, it can be persuasively argued that the purpose of the war on drugs is not to decrease use of illegal drugs. Rather the purpose is to feed and grow a multi-billion dollar industry created by the government and Big Pharma. In addition to pushing the “zero-tolerance” orthodoxy through school curriculum (with police as instructors) that parallels current U.S. drug control policy, D.A.R.E. recruits children to act as police informants. The war on drugs is on the cutting-edge of the police state emerging all around us.

The drug war also builds and expands the for-profit prison grid system. In 2007, according to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, the largest state prison demographic consisted of people imprisoned for drug-related offenses. In 2001, according to the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s annual Uniform Crime Report, police arrested an estimated 723,627 persons for marijuana violations. In 1991, the number was 342,314. Since 1992, approximately six million Americans have been arrested on marijuana charges, a greater number than the entire populations of Alaska, Delaware, the District of Columbia, Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, Vermont and Wyoming combined.

Around the country people are organizing to put an end to this madness. In California, proponents of an initiative to make California the first state to legalize marijuana have collected about 693,800 signatures, virtually guaranteeing that the measure will appear on a crowded November ballot, the Los Angeles Times reported last month. The initiative would make it legal for anyone 21 and older to possess an ounce of marijuana and grow plants in an area no larger than 25 square feet for personal use. It would also allow cities and counties to permit marijuana to be grown and sold, and to impose taxes on it.

Meanwhile, in Colorado, the legality of medical marijuana dispensaries may soon go to a vote. “I don’t see anything wrong with it, I think it’s going to be monitored closely. I think there is a need for marijuana to be okay for people who have terminal illness,” said one resident, a retired nurse.

“Depending on the poll, either a majority or near-majority of Americans say that marijuana should be taxed and legalized. Even the American Medical Assn. has called for the federal government to review its absurd classification of marijuana as a Schedule 1 drug, which puts cannabis right alongside heroin and PCP,” writes Jonathan Perri. “D.A.R.E. can warn people all day about the harm associated with marijuana use. What it refuses to acknowledge is that these arguments only support ending prohibition. If marijuana is so dangerous, D.A.R.E. and its allies ought to support efforts to remove control over distribution from black-market drug dealers.”// < ![CDATA[
ch_client = "Rob";
ch_type = "mpu";
ch_width = 468;
ch_height = 180;
ch_non_contextual = 4;
ch_vertical ="premium";
ch_sid = "Chitika Premium";
var ch_queries = new Array( );
var ch_selected=Math.floor((Math.random()*ch_queries.length));
if ( ch_selected

The Federal and government, however, will not go down without a fight. “While users herald the freedom of legally-licensed ‘weed,’ powerful forces at the DEA and law enforcement haven’t given up their federal enforcement power yet,” a write-up to Kevin Booth’s latest documentary, How Weed Won the West, explains. “In the backdrop of this public dispute is the Dark Alliance– where governments handle the volume of drug trafficking and work with cartels and drug dealers to manage the drug flow. Just like the prohibition of alcohol, drugs have thrived on their illicit appeal, and doomed millions of non-violent offenders to incarceration and prosecution. Now, those swearing by the healing power of medicinal marijuana as well as those who simply refuse to be outlawed by a hypocritical rogue government are daring to stand up and declare that the violence, corruption and uncontrolled flow of drugs is due to the prohibition of the substance, not the substance itself.”

Obama’s handlers billed him as the “change” candidate, but when it comes to marijuana he is merely continuing the policies of his predecessor and those before him, going all the way back to 1937 when marijuana was classified as a dangerous and illegal drug under the Harrison Narcotic Act, a bill pushed by the American Medical Association and supported by the president at the time. On Monday during a forum sponsored by YouTube, Obama refused to answer any questions about legalizing marijuana.

Kevin Booth’s documentary provides crucial background on the government’s long-standing war against marijuana. Even if you are opposed to the use of marijuana, this issue is rapidly becoming one of several focal points in the battle between the states and the federal government. Do the feds have the right to intervene in state-based medical marijuana dispensaries? Do they have the authority to overturn locally enacted laws decriminalizing or even legalizing marijuana?

In How Weed Won the West, Booth investigates these issues and more. “He infiltrates psuedo-legal California growers, investigates DEA raids on licensed dispensaries and even undertakes to sample the disputed ‘medicine’ for himself. He interviews radio host Alex Jones, former drug dealers, real-life gang members, legal-weed pitch men, activists and advocates to find the truth.”

Marijuana legalization — like it or not — is at the forefront of the liberty movement. Booth’s film is a perfect starting point to get educated on this important issue.