IF I DO MY OWN RESEARCH?

I have hundreds of hours dedicated to researching the drug war and the drugs themselves.

I have probably spent more time at one website, NIDA, then you have spent researching drugs and the drug war.

I have read all the statistics, I know that harsher penalties do not lower illegal drug use. Just look at how harsh the penalties were for crack cocaine and how it's use still increased for years. Of course now crack use is starting to go down, in large part due to new drugs like Meth and the absue of prescription drugs like Vicodin and Oxycontin.

Do you know who Mike Levine is? How about Dennis Dayle, or Celerino Castillo, or Jack Blum?

The 1980's CIA collusion with allied drug traffickers lead to the formation of a protected narcotics pipeline, resulting an increase in supply and drop in price. Former DEA agents have repeatedly pointed out that 50%-70% of the cocaine entering the U.S. went via drug cartels that enjoyed CIA protection.

So, you want tp throw dealers in jail for life, for selling drugs that were brought into this country by CIA assets?

Hmmm, sounds kind of hypocritical to me?

Do you think the CIA stopped supporting drug dealers? Why? Who in the CIA was punished for past crimes?

Why would they stop when no one in the CIA was punished?

CIA Narco-colonialism in the 20th Century



You see, I know you have not done any significant research on this topic, as it is obvious from your position. I have NEVER MET A SINGLE DRUG WAR SUPPORTER EVER WHO HAS DONE ANY SIGNIFICANT READING ON THIS TOPIC.

NOT ONCE.

NOT EVER.

Go ahead and prove me wrong and tell me how much research you have done.

Mike Levine, a DEA agent for 17 years said.........

# "For decades, the CIA, the Pentagon, and secret organizations like Oliver North's Enterprise have been supporting and protecting the world's biggest drug dealers.... The Contras and some of their Central American allies ... have been documented by DEA as supplying us with at least 50 percent of our national cocaine consumption. They were the main conduit to the United States for Colombian cocaine during the 1980's. The rest of the drug supply for the American habit came from other CIA-supported groups, such as DFS (Mexican CIA), the Shan United Army in the Golden Triangle of Southeast Asia, or any of a score of other groups and/or individuals like Manual Noriega." (The Big White Lie: The CIA and the Cocaine/Crack Epidemic, 1993)

Notice the first two words...........

FOR DECADES....

Do you understand what the word decade means?

Why don't you take a valium and learn to read. I said if you do your OWN SEARCH, you know the very same one you DARED me to do:

Quote:

Norrin Rad Go ahead and type these words into google and start reading......... "CIA PROTECTS LARGEST DRUG DEALERS" I DARE YOU.

I merely pointed out, that having accepted your dare, it was simply a matter of fact that many of the top search results made reference to CIA protection of some drug lords as part of the overall support to the Contras in our efforts against the global threat of communism.


Actually, you could not possibly have any research on the impact of focusing our drug interdication exclusively on dealers and trafficers, both through more focused enforcement efforts, and substantially tougher penalties, because WE HAVE NEVER DONE IT.

Even your citation of China, which executes "100 people per year" for drug trafficing and dealing cannot be taking as a meaningful example of what the deterant effects would be. An essential element in the deterant effect of even the stiffest penalties is also the LIKELYHOOD of actually getting caught and convicted. I don't think it is reasonable to assume that 100 people represent anthing but the most insignificant and minute percentage of those dealing drugs in China.

Which part of sometimes having to make trade-offs between the LESSER of two EVILS for the greater good did you not grasp? Is it hypocritical to let mob hitmen off with no punishment other than being in the witness protection program in order to further the greater governmental goal of getting the mob bosses? This is no different in the case of the CIA, which has a central role in protecting our society from global threats (such as the soviet union over most of the last 70 years)

I think the CIA continues to protect those who are still of greater use to our nation's interests than the harm they do by protecting them. I also think that the CIA will readily drop its support of anyone who is no longer of use to, let alone a net harm to our nation's interests.

Those in the CIA shouldn't be punished any more than a prosecutor who gives a no-jail time plea arrangement for a mob hitman, guilty of murder in order to facilitate the more important goal of getting mob bosses.

No thoughtful discussion of the CIAs actions, or inaction can take place without looking at the WHY and TO WHAT EFFECT (both positive and negative) of their actions.



I don't NEED to do any research on the substance of an argument, which on its face is irrelevant to the topic at hand, and OBVIOUSLY lacking a full perspective.

What has your research taught you about WHY the CIA has been doing these things?

CONTEXT is everything in thoughtful discussion. If I tell you a cop shot someone in the head last night, would you just surmize that this was flat out wrong an inexcusable criminal act of murder? OR, would you have the intellectual capacity to ask WHY the cop shot the person, what was the REASON for it before drawing conclusions about the propriety of the act?

__________________
"It's a good feeling to shoot a bad guy. Something you democrats would never understand. Americans are homesteaders, we want a safe home, keep the money we make, and shoot bad guys!"

----Denny Crane

Marcus,

I have to go to work now, so this will be short.

First of all I apologize for my "tone."

I understand what you are saying about trade offs, but these so called trade offs, are used to often. The threat from communism during the 80's was a joke. Communism was almost dead. There is no threat from communism. What is a threat is the "nationalization" of resources like oil. You see, we simply can't allow countries to nationalize their oil, as this would cut out the US and British oil companies from making profits. Then, if one country successfully nationalized oil, others might follow. This is why the CIA helped install the Shah of Iran, all because Mossadegh wanted to nationalize their oil and natural gas. Can't have that.

As to the war on drugs, it is not a real war when a government agency is allowing drugs to come into this country. If drugs are so bad that we need to lock drug dealers away for life, then the CIA should NEVER have protected drug cartels, no matter what the possible costs were. Either drugs are evil, or they are not. I say they are no worse than alcohol, as to the pain and suffering they cause, so if you support drug prohibition, you should also support alcohol prohibition. Do you know how many people die each year from drug use? Not drug related crimes, but from drug use? Now, how many people die a year from alcohol use? From tobacco use?

The fact is, that the drug war has taken EVERY SINGLE PROBLEM ASSOCIATED WITH DRUG USE AND MADE THOSE PROBLEMS WORSE.

Hell, we can't even keep drugs out of our prisons and our schools, yet we have an alleged war on drugs.

edit: almost forgot, the reason the CIA is so involved in the drug trade has nothing to do with national security, it has to do with protecting US corporate profits and funding covert CIA operations.

I think this is proof of just how wealthy the U.S. is compared to other nations. Our ability to incarcerate individuals should be really intimidating to other nations and make them jealous of us.

__________________
Is our children learning? -George W. Bush

"I think—tide turning—see, as I remember—I was raised in the desert, but tides kind of—it's easy to see a tide turn—did I say those words?"—Washington, D.C., June 14, 2006

"[T]he illiteracy level of our children are appalling."—Washington, D.C., Jan. 23, 2004

You're saying some should be ashamed of their superior education and health care systems instead of concentrating on the important thing, jailing as many of their society as possible?

Why do so many people lack the capacity to understand basic English. Where exactly has ANYONE suggested we jail "as many people" as possible. If if irrational hyperbole could kill, it would take care of liberalism once and for all.

__________________
"It's a good feeling to shoot a bad guy. Something you democrats would never understand. Americans are homesteaders, we want a safe home, keep the money we make, and shoot bad guys!"

----Denny Crane

Clearly, hyperbole is limited to liberals

__________________
When they come a wull staun ma groon
Staun ma groon al nae be afraid
Thoughts awe hame tak awa ma fear
Sweat an bluid hide ma veil awe tears

Don't get me wrong, if hyperbole could kill, plenty of people all along the political spectrum would be left dead in the streets. But, utterly irrational hyperbole that evidences inability to see fundamental distinctions and sense of perspective sure seem to be disproportionately frequent on the left.

One of my all time favorites, when arguing for lower tax rates and overall taxation on people, is when the left responds "police or roads, which are you willing to make do with less of?" as though police and roads are the only conceivable things that government spends money on that could be reduced or eliminated.

__________________
"It's a good feeling to shoot a bad guy. Something you democrats would never understand. Americans are homesteaders, we want a safe home, keep the money we make, and shoot bad guys!"

----Denny Crane

Holding the current record for most incarcerated per-capita in developed countries is now liberal hyperbole?

No, but characerising what AjaxPress said as supporting the "jailing as many of their [our] society as possible" most certainly is.

__________________
"It's a good feeling to shoot a bad guy. Something you democrats would never understand. Americans are homesteaders, we want a safe home, keep the money we make, and shoot bad guys!"

----Denny Crane

Are you saying the statistics are cooked? We don't hold that record?

Were you dropped on your head as a baby? Why can't you grasp this single basic fact. Just because we have the highest level of incarceration, and that AjaxPress pointed out that the fact that we can AFFORD to have that level of incarceration...whereas many other countries could not, does NOT support your idiotic statement suggesting that someone is suggesting that we should have the GOAL of "jailing as many of their society as possible"

Maybe we should try it like this. How about you specifically quote where anyone in this discussion has suggested that "jailing as many of their society as possible" is in and of itself a goal to be proud of (as opposed to being able to AFFORD to do jail criminals at such rate above those of other countries who can't even afford to do so if they wanted to).

__________________
"It's a good feeling to shoot a bad guy. Something you democrats would never understand. Americans are homesteaders, we want a safe home, keep the money we make, and shoot bad guys!"

----Denny Crane

hyperbole has a liberal bias.

__________________
Is our children learning? -George W. Bush

"I think—tide turning—see, as I remember—I was raised in the desert, but tides kind of—it's easy to see a tide turn—did I say those words?"—Washington, D.C., June 14, 2006

"[T]he illiteracy level of our children are appalling."—Washington, D.C., Jan. 23, 2004

Keep a civil tongue.

Considering many states are reaching a point of spending more on criminal judicial proceedings and incarceration than education affordability is questionable and reinforces the fact of why we hold the record for incarceration. Yes, given the drug laws, our class distinctions and racial prejudices it does look like we're trying to incarcerate as many of our lower class citizens as possible.

Nothing uncivil in my tone, just really curious as to how you seem to be drawing such baseless conclusions about what other people have said.

First of all, the notion that spending more on our criminal justice proceedings than we do on education is evidence of "affordability" being "questionable" is a non-sequitor...again illustrating the point I made about the left being seemingly incapable of seeing the full range of options in any given situation (is there really NOTHING other than education that states spend money on which could instead be spent to afford incarceration?)



Yes, given the drug laws, our class distinctions and racial prejudices it does look like we're trying to incarcerate as many of our lower class citizens as possible.

"It does look like"....well, I for one do not believe in making shallow assumptions about people's motives based on mere 'appearances'. By your standards, I could say that it very much appears that liberals are promoting the promulgation of generational social and economic disfunction and dependency among the lower classes...particularly minorities, because so many of their social "welfare" policies of the last 40 years have resulted in far more entrenched individual and generational poverty, as well as an debilitating culture of utter dependency. But that whereas that has been the EFFECT, I do not assume that was the INTENT.

Furthermore, what you said was in DIRECT response to AjaxPress's statement about the fact that we can afford to incarcerate so many people is indicative of the overwhelming wealth of our society compared to many others, and NOTHING in Ajax' statement can reasonably be taken to suggest that "jailing as many of their [our] society as possible" is something to be proud of, ashamed of, or strived for. There was absolutely NO judgement about doing it in that statement, merely a rather valid point about what it says about the wealth of our nation that we CAN do it if we so chose to. Whether it is WISE to do so or not was not even hinted at one way or the other in ajax's statememt; yet your direct response to that statement suggested rather strongly that it did.

__________________
"It's a good feeling to shoot a bad guy. Something you democrats would never understand. Americans are homesteaders, we want a safe home, keep the money we make, and shoot bad guys!"

----Denny Crane