portrait of an enemy

[MSimon]

Powderburns: Cocaine, Contras & the Drug War

Look up the author DEA agent Celerino III Castillo. Very famous in the circles interested in this subject.

[MSimon]

Of course GIT doesn't have the time. Why should he. It doesn't match his world view. Very few can handle information that shakes their world view.

[GIThruster]

It doesn't affect my world view one way of the other. I couldn't care less. Just sounds like an incredible waste of time. You'd understand that if you had to work for a living instead of living off the hard work of others.

[MSimon]

It doesn't affect my world view one way of the other. I couldn't care less. Just sounds like an incredible waste of time. You'd understand that if you had to work for a living instead of living off the hard work of others.

I'm living off my own hard work. At least that was what the government told me when I was paying into Social Security.

And if I'm not affecting your world view why advise people to pay me no attention? You would think if what I have posted was BS that people could figure it out on their own.

Good to see you in such pain though. You who advised people to pay me no attention can't even take your own advice. You are a comic. Unintentional. But still.

You can't win a Drug War if the Government which bans drugs is also importing them.

If drugs are an evil influence then we have an evil government.

[MSimon]

Watch this video to see who is behind today's economic mess.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-rFWDHQcIG8

Mike Ruppert - The CIA and Drug Running

Watch the question that starts about 1:17 into the video. In answer Mike explains the whole premise of the Drug War and who is behind it. The Bankers.

Now read the following three part Narco News series by Catherine Austin Fitts linked here:

Links here: http://classicalvalues.com/2011/11/why- ... ohibition/

She corroborates Mike Ruppert.

Now Mike didn't have the information we have today. Today we know that a very large percentage of drug use is self medication. And given our still primitive stage of knowledge maybe all of it. Which is why drug demand is so inelastic.

[hanelyp]

You can't win a Drug War if the Government which bans drugs is also importing them.

Yes, except I regard the assertion that the CIA is a major player in the drug business as unproven. If the DEA were colluding with the CIA to fund the latter's operation, the incentive would be to shut down, as best possible, any drug channels not using the alleged CIA pipeline.

I also take as a base principle in evaluating conspiracy theories that secrets are hard to keep. More so if they require large numbers or unethical people to keep the secret.

[Betruger]

And if I'm not affecting your world view why advise people to pay me no attention? You would think if what I have posted was BS that people could figure it out on their own.

Good to see you in such pain though. You who advised people to pay me no attention can't even take your own advice. You are a comic. Unintentional. But still.

See his signature. That is his MO.

[choff]

You can't win a Drug War if the Government which bans drugs is also importing them.

Yes, except I regard the assertion that the CIA is a major player in the drug business as unproven. If the DEA were colluding with the CIA to fund the latter's operation, the incentive would be to shut down, as best possible, any drug channels not using the alleged CIA pipeline.

I also take as a base principle in evaluating conspiracy theories that secrets are hard to keep. More so if they require large numbers or unethical people to keep the secret.

The DEA is basically there to elimanate the competition. There's a very simple way to assess if a conspiracy is taking place. Check out the airfield in Mena Arkansas or Venice beach Florida for irregularities.

[MSimon]

You can't win a Drug War if the Government which bans drugs is also importing them.

Yes, except I regard the assertion that the CIA is a major player in the drug business as unproven. If the DEA were colluding with the CIA to fund the latter's operation, the incentive would be to shut down, as best possible, any drug channels not using the alleged CIA pipeline.

I also take as a base principle in evaluating conspiracy theories that secrets are hard to keep. More so if they require large numbers or unethical people to keep the secret.

OK. Unproven you say. Then what about all the books I have posted on the subject? What about the DEA agents who have narced on the agency? Mike Levine say. This was from 60 Minutes:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H45bbwhMhm8

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Levine_%28DEA%29

In this video - former LA police detective Mike Ruppert names names - and gives places and dates. He also mentions Michael Levine in the vid - several times.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-rFWDHQcIG8

Look at the question he is asked about 1 hour and 17 minutes into the video.

All that is required to keep the secret is large numbers of people who don't want to look. People like you for instance. You don't have to convince everyone. If you can convince 90% that the 10% who know are "crazy conspiracy theorists" that works well enough. Just look at how I'm treated here on the subject.

Large numbers of unethical people are not difficult to create. You pay them to "fight drugs" and don't let them in on the secret until they are well hooked on the money.

Look at a couple of psychology experiments:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jane_Elliott

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milgram_experiment

Let us start with something easy. The historical record. The British Empire.

Opium from India to China. Silk from China to Britain. British silk to the world. Start with that history. Then work your way forward. Especially look into American involvement. China clippers.

I don't have much respect for Lyndon LaRouche. He is a communist and everything he does is slanted to assist the communists. But he got the general outline right.

http://larouchepac.com/node/14157

The triangular trade from India to China to Britain is in the historical record. It has never stopped. It has morphed. Heh. Want to look into it present day? Look into the Wars for French Indo China. Also what happened to the Chinese opium trade post Mao. Burma. Laos. 'Nam.

It is all there in the open record. If you want to look. So few do. Because the only people who believe this stuff are "conspiracy nuts". Easily dismissed.

Well you know me. I'm rather rational. I could be wrong. But instead of dismissing my claims why don't you look at the evidence and judge it for yourself? You know. Do your own research. Same as you do for Polywell.

[seedload]

How do you intend to make prohibition work with the CIA protecting opium supplies and running drugs?
I look forward to your answer on that one. It should provide endless amusement.

I would first have to buy into the premise that the CIA funds its operations by trafficking drugs and second believe that it was right for the CIA to do so before your attempt at a trap question could be effective.

I don't believe that the CIA should traffic drugs.

I have presented numerous links on the subject. And then there is Google. You mean on such a serious subject you haven't checked it out?

I'm shocked.

Let me know when you have done some research and then get back to me. I'm always interested in discussing things.

I will give you a hint though. Your government has been lying to you. Another shocker. To be sure.

Your premise was that I can't support drugs being illegal when our government (CIA) is dealing drugs. My answer was that I also don't support the CIA dealing drugs. There was nothing for you to be shocked by and no need to get your panties in a bunch about my lack of research. Regardless of whether the CIA is actually trafficking drugs or not, my answer that I don't support them doing so is completely consistent with my opinion that most drugs should remain illegal.

Your continued posts with third person discussions about my child like ignorance to the tangential topic of CIA shenanigans is inconsequential to the logic of my reply.

This along with numerous other examples of ignoring responses and inventing opposition positions and personalities demonstrate that you are working in nothing more than continuous vomit of confused consciousness mode with little intent to actually engage in conversation.

My opinion is that your unfiltered and disjointed kaleidoscope of arguments has long ago jumped the shark from advocacy to raving.

Good luck with that.