Home | Community | Message Board


FreeSpores.com
Please support our sponsors.

General Interest >> Political Discussion

Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Amazon Shop for: Ayahuasca, DXM, Hemp, San Pedro

Jump to first unread post. Pages: 1
OfflineLSDempire
LibertarianEnforcer
 User Gallery

Registered: 04/23/05
Posts: 581
Last seen: 11 years, 1 day
The modern opium war.
    #4129932 - 05/03/05 11:20 PM (11 years, 7 months ago)

"Bush aids and abets the opium trade!

The LA Times reports today that the current opium harvest in Afghanistan is expected to set a record as the biggest harvest ever!
(The folling commentary is not from the Times, tho some of the data is.)

The Taliban had almost completely snuffed out opium growing, going so far as to execute entire families who farmed opium. Under the American occupation...oh excuse me...allied occupation LOL...the opium trade has boomed.

Guess where the opium/heroin is going to end up? On the streets of Europe and America.

This makes George Bush an accomplice to the drug trade, in my opinion.

Msongs
Riverside CA
click my name for Dean and anti Bush shirts
(sorry, have to get your heroin from the republicans hehe)"

http://www.blogforamerica.com/archives/003630.html

This fascist seems to be trying to say that Bush is soft in the war on drugs, because he thinks killing entire families is going to far? I hate Bush because he supports the war on drugs and fused it with the war on terror, But if this guy likes the Taliban as much as I think he does I hate him a lot more. Nixon rewarded China with open trade because they also killed entire families in order to stomp out the opium trade. The only thing that shocks me more than this article is the number of hypocrites that support the war on drugs on this forum, they include DieCommie, Psychoactive1984 (his name shows you what a hypocrite he is), zappaisgod, CaptainJailew, and RandalFlagg. These hypocrites and fascists will stop at nothing to shut me up, which is one of the reasons I keep posting.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleRavus
Not an EggshellWalker
 User Gallery

Registered: 07/18/03
Posts: 7,991
Loc: Cave of the Patriarchs
Re: The modern opium war. [Re: LSDempire]
    #4130182 - 05/04/05 12:00 AM (11 years, 7 months ago)

I don't see that as a bad thing though. The more flooded the streets are with drugs, the more of a failure the War on Drugs will be shown to be. We escalate it, we pour money into it, and yet hard drugs are cheaper and purer than ever before. The black market's doing a good job.

I don't think those people support the War on Drugs either. If they support the legalization of all drugs, which I believe some of them do, then they'd obviously be against the War on Drugs. How to deal with DEA agents is another issue than the War on Drugs entirely; it's like saying that because you don't support the death of all the Cuban politicians in Cuba, you support communism.


--------------------
So long as you are praised think only that you are not yet on your own path but on that of another.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineLSDempire
LibertarianEnforcer
 User Gallery

Registered: 04/23/05
Posts: 581
Last seen: 11 years, 1 day
Re: The modern opium war. [Re: Ravus]
    #4130422 - 05/04/05 12:40 AM (11 years, 7 months ago)

None of them support the legalization of all drugs, but some of them support legalizing certain drugs. I do support the death of any Cuban politician that supports that Stalinist system.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleSoopaX
Criminal DrugAnalyst

Registered: 11/13/04
Posts: 1,690
Re: The modern opium war. [Re: LSDempire]
    #4131665 - 05/04/05 10:25 AM (11 years, 7 months ago)

So now the farmers who were executed under the Taliban are back to producing, knowing that we aren't so horrible to kill them for their actions? Yet another failure on the part of the US.


--------------------


Jackie Treehorn treats objects like women, man


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlinezappaisgod
horrid asshole

Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 6 months, 2 days
Re: The modern opium war. [Re: SoopaX]
    #4133215 - 05/04/05 04:53 PM (11 years, 7 months ago)

Why are you complaining? We have liberated these wonderful farmers and allowed them to resume their former livelihood and supply us with beautiful, beautiful opiates. You should be happy.


--------------------


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Invisiblecubed
Stranger

Registered: 12/23/04
Posts: 29
Re: The modern opium war. [Re: zappaisgod]
    #4133632 - 05/04/05 06:32 PM (11 years, 7 months ago)

to liberate the trade itself too, that would be nice.

....maybe that's too much to ask for tho eh? Craaaazy


--------------------
booohooohoooohoooo


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineLearyfan
It's the psychedelic movement!
Male User Gallery

Registered: 04/20/01
Posts: 29,762
Loc: High pride!
Last seen: 9 hours, 38 minutes
Re: The modern opium war. [Re: zappaisgod]
    #4134036 - 05/04/05 07:51 PM (11 years, 7 months ago)

Quote:

zappaisgod said:
Why are you complaining? We have liberated these wonderful farmers and allowed them to resume their former livelihood and supply us with beautiful, beautiful opiates. You should be happy.




For once, we agree.






--------------------
--------------------------------


Mp3 of the month: The Loose Enz - The Black Door



Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineLSDempire
LibertarianEnforcer
 User Gallery

Registered: 04/23/05
Posts: 581
Last seen: 11 years, 1 day
Re: The modern opium war. [Re: Learyfan]
    #4186590 - 05/17/05 02:41 PM (11 years, 6 months ago)

Growing opium is still illegal in Afghanistan, if it were legalized 100 percent I would not be complaining.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineMushmonkey
shiftlesslayabout
 User Gallery

Registered: 09/26/03
Posts: 10,378
Last seen: 2 years, 3 months
Re: The modern opium war. [Re: LSDempire]
    #4188956 - 05/17/05 11:22 PM (11 years, 6 months ago)

So is it better in your opinion if we were to continue killing those found growing opium?

Or are you just so fast to sling mud that you'll even claim that Bush is worse than murdering for drug offenses? Buh? Am I missing something here?


--------------------
i finally got around to making a sig
revel in its glory and quake in fear at its might
grar.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineLSDempire
LibertarianEnforcer
 User Gallery

Registered: 04/23/05
Posts: 581
Last seen: 11 years, 1 day
Re: The modern opium war. [Re: Mushmonkey]
    #4193559 - 05/19/05 01:32 AM (11 years, 6 months ago)

Quote:

Mushmonkey said:
So is it better in your opinion if we were to continue killing those found growing opium?

Or are you just so fast to sling mud that you'll even claim that Bush is worse than murdering for drug offenses? Buh? Am I missing something here?




No, I am saying the government Afghanistan has now is better than the Taliban in the same way the US government is better than the Chinese government, but that does not mean there is not more that can be done to improve the governments in question.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleSoopaX
Criminal DrugAnalyst

Registered: 11/13/04
Posts: 1,690
Re: The modern opium war. [Re: LSDempire]
    #4193573 - 05/19/05 01:35 AM (11 years, 6 months ago)

More drugs are produced in nations that have more freedom. Isn't that a given?


--------------------


Jackie Treehorn treats objects like women, man


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineLSDempire
LibertarianEnforcer
 User Gallery

Registered: 04/23/05
Posts: 581
Last seen: 11 years, 1 day
Re: The modern opium war. [Re: SoopaX]
    #4193585 - 05/19/05 01:41 AM (11 years, 6 months ago)

Quote:

SoopaX said:
More drugs are produced in nations that have more freedom. Isn't that a given?




Yes! :tongue:


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineLSDempire
LibertarianEnforcer
 User Gallery

Registered: 04/23/05
Posts: 581
Last seen: 11 years, 1 day
Re: The modern opium war. [Re: LSDempire]
    #4484355 - 08/02/05 07:00 AM (11 years, 4 months ago)

prohibition (drugs)
The prohibition of drugs through legislation or religious law is a common means of controlling the perceived negative consequences of recreational drug use at a society- or world-wide level. Present-day attempts to enforce drug prohibition are frequently considered to be part of the ongoing war on drugs instituted by United States president Richard Nixon in 1972.

The prohibition of non-medical drug use is controversial. Opponents often feel that prohibition unfairly impinges on the perceived right of the individual to alter their consciousness. They also argue that prohibition is an expensive and ineffective means of controlling the negative effects of non-medical drug use. Proponents of prohibition feel that the use of psychoactive drugs outside of a medical context is dangerous, and that prohibition is the best means of control. Some people also oppose the use of certain drugs on moral or dogmatic grounds. For further elaboration see: Arguments for and against drug prohibition.


Scope
Most countries have a similar set of prohibited drugs. Some exceptions exist; most notably, Islamic countries mostly prohibit the use of alcohol, while most other states allow at least adults to purchase and consume alcohol. The United States, Finland, Canada, and the USSR also instituted alcohol prohibition in the first half of the 20th century. All countries regulate the manufacture, distribution, marketing and sale of some or all drugs, such as by using a prescription system. Only certain drugs are banned with a "blanket prohibition" against all use. However, the prohibited drugs generally continue to be available through the illegal drug trade. Many countries allow a certain amount of personal use of certain drugs, but not sale or manufacture. Some also set a specific amount of a particular drug, above which is ipso jure considered to be evidence of trafficking or sale of the drug.

In July 2000, the Taliban rulers of Afghanistan ruled opium to be "against Islam" and outlawed it, with verbal and foreign aid support of the US government. After the Taliban was swept out of power by the USA (for other reasons), opium cultivation resumed. In April 2004, Afghan interim president Hamid Karzai declared a jihad on drugs (after opium output reached a near-record 3,600 tonnes in 2003 -- equivalent to three-quarters of world supply).


History

Early Drug Laws
Although the present War on Drugs is a distinctly modern phenomenon, drug laws have been a common feature of human culture throughout history.

Perhaps the earliest recorded example in the Old World is the prohibition of the use of alcohol under Islamic law (Sharia), which is usually attributed to passages in the Qur'an purportedly dating from the 7th century. Although Islamic law is often interpreted as prohibiting all intoxicants (not only alcohol), the ancient practice of hashish smoking has continued throughout the history of Islam, against varying degrees of resistance. A major campaign against hashish-eating Sufis was conducted in Egypt in the 11th and 12th centuries resulting among other things in the burning of fields of cannabis, and the public torture of hashish users (Ref 1).

Religious intolerance was also the motivation for drug prohibition in Christian Europe. In a move interpreted as support of the efforts of the Spanish Inquisition against the Arabs, in a 1484 fiat Pope Innocent VIII banned the use of cannabis. The persecution of heretics in the form of witch-hunts also gathered momentum around this time, and frequently targeted users of medicinal and hallucinogenic herbs. The Inquisition proceeded apace in Central America and South America, where peyote, ololiuqui, toloache, teonanacatl and other sacred plants of the Aztec culture were prohibited as works of the devil.

In Northern Europe, the Protestants were also guilty of passing drug laws motivated by religious intolerance, according to Stephen Harrod Buhner (Ref 2). Buhner argues that the 1516 Reinheitsgebot, which stipulates that beer may only contain water, malt and hops was a "reflection of Protestant irritation about 'drugs' and the Catholic Church". Unlike the typically stimulating herbal blends widely used at the time (e.g. gruit), hops cause sedation and reduce libido. In 1536 Edward VI commended hopped beer as "notable, healthy and temperate", while the exclusive use of hops had been compulsory in France since 1268 (Ref 3).

Coffee almost followed the same fate as cannabis as its use spread from Ethiopia through the Middle East to Europe. Its use was banned in the Middle East on numerous occasions as in conflict with Islamic law, but eventually it came to be accepted. The introduction of coffee in Europe from Muslim Turkey also prompted calls for it to be banned as the Devil's work, however Pope Clement VIII sanctioned its use, declaring that it was "so delicious that it would be a pity to let the infidels have exclusive use of it."

In late Qing Imperial China, opium imported by the British East Indian Company was vastly consumed by all social classes in Southern China. Between 1821 and 1837 imports of the drug increased five-fold. The Chinese government attempted to end this trade, on public health grounds. The effort was initially successful with the destruction of all British opium stock in May 1839. However to protect this trade, the British declared war on China (First Opium War). China was defeated and the war which ended with the Treaty of Nanking, in which the opium trade is legalized. The resulting trade greatly weakened Chinese society, and set into motion a chain of events that would lead to the massive Taiping Rebellion.


Twentieth century
The next great wave of anti-drug legislation began in the late 19th century, and continues to the present day. The United States has been the driving force in the present-day war on drugs.

The first law outright prohibiting the use of a specific drug was a San Francisco, California ordinance which banned the smoking of opium in opium dens in 1875. The inspiration was "many women and young girls, as well as young men of respectable family, were being induced to visit the Chinese opium-smoking dens, where they were ruined morally and otherwise." The primary cause of the movement for the law was a moral panic based on a fear of Chinese immigrants and other railroad workers seducing white women with the drug. This was followed by other laws throughout the country, and federal laws which barred Chinese people from trafficking in opium. Though the laws affected the use and distribution of opium by Chinese immigrants, no action was taken against the producers of such products as laudanum, a mixture of opium and alcohol, commonly taken as a panacea by white Americans. The dividing line was usually the manner in which the drug was ingested. Chinese immigrants smoked it, while it was included in various kinds of (generally liquid) medicines for white people. The laws were aimed at smoking opium, but not otherwise ingesting it. 1 (http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/library/studies/cu/cu6.htm) As a result of this discrepancy, modern commentators believe that these laws were racist in origin and intent.

Cocaine was prohibited in the first part of the 20th century. Newspapers used terms like "Negro Cocaine Fiends" and "Cocainized Niggers" to drive up sales, causing a nationwide panic about the rape of white women by black men, high on cocaine. Many police forces changed from a .32 caliber to a .38 caliber pistol because the smaller gun was supposedly unable to kill black men when they were high on cocaine.

This was followed by the Harrison Act, which required sellers of opiates and cocaine to get a license (which were usually only distributed to white people). The supporters of the Harrison Act did not support blanket prohibition of the drugs involved 1 (http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/library/studies/cu/cu8.html). This is also true of the later Marijuana Tax Act in 1937. Soon, however, the people who were allowed to issue the licenses did not do so, effectively banning the drugs.

The American judicial system did not initially accept drug prohibition. Prosecutors argued that possessing drugs was a tax violation, as no legal licenses to sell drugs were in existence; hence, a person possessing drugs must have purchased them from an unlicensed source. After some wrangling, this was accepted as federal jurisdiction under the interstate commerce clause of the U.S. Constitution.

The prohibition of alcohol commenced in the United States in 1920 and Finland in 1919. Because alcohol was the most popular recreational drug in these countries, reactions to its prohibition were very different to those of other drugs, which were commonly perceived to be associated with racial and ethnic minorities. Public pressure led to the repealing of alcohol prohibition in 1933 in the United States, 1932 in Finland. Residents of many provinces of Canada also experienced alcohol prohibition for similar periods of time in the first half of the 20th century.

In Sweden a referendum in 1922 decided against an alcohol prohibition law (with 51% of the votes against and 49% for prohibition), but starting in 1914 (nationwide from 1917) and until 1955 Sweden employed an alcohol rationing system with personal liquor ration books ("motbok").

1937 saw the passage of the Marijuana Tax Act. Harry J. Anslinger (Bureau of Narcotics Commissioner) testified in hearings on the subject that the hemp plant needed to be banned because it had a violent "effect on the degenerate races". This specifically referred to Mexican immigrants who had entered the country, seeking jobs during the Great Depression. The law passed quickly and with little debate. The American Medical Association (AMA) protested the law soon after, both on the grounds of actual disagreement with the law and the supporters' lies on the subject; Anslinger and others had claimed the AMA had vocalized support when, in fact, the opposite was true.

In response to rising drug use amongst young people and the counter-culture in particular, efforts to enforce prohibition were strengthened in many countries from the late 1960s onwards. In 1972 United States president Richard Nixon announced the commencement of the so-called War on Drugs. Later, President Reagan added the position of drug czar to the President's Executive Office.

Lobbying at an international level for the prohibition of non-medical drug use has been a feature of United States policy since the beginnings of the modern War on Drugs in the late 20th century, to such an extent that US support for foreign governments is sometimes contingent on adherence to US drug policy. Major milestones in this campaign include the successful introduction of the Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs in 1961, the Convention on Psychotropic Substances in 1971 and the United Nations Convention Against Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances in 1988.


Methods of enforcement
The War on Drugs utilizes several techniques to achieve its goal of eliminating recreational drug use:

specialized law enforcement agencies, officers and techniques
information campaigns to educate the public on the real or perceived dangers of recreational drug use
streamlined enforcement and evidence-gathering procedures
The War on Drugs involves action taken against three groups of criminals:

Manufacturers (whether through chemical synthesis or agriculture)
Traffickers and dealers
Users
A War on Drugs is usually run like a modern war with police and other law enforcement officers instead of military personnel. The apparatus prepared for the War is ordinarily organized to face guerrilla situations, armed attacks or counter-attacks and bombings. These tactics include espionage, as undercover agents (spies) are used to infiltrate drug use and trafficking circles.

Investigation on drug trafficking often begins with the recording of unusually frequent deaths by overdose, monitoring financial flows of suspected traffickers, or by finding concrete elements while inspecting for other purposes. For example, a person pulled over for traffic violations may have illicit drugs in his or her vehicle, thus leading to an arrest and/or investigation of the source of the materials. Most investigations into trafficking or manufacturing are fruitless, and casual users remain at a greater risk of arrest, conviction and imprisonment than others.


Legal Provisions
The following frequently used drugs are prohibited or otherwise regulated for recreational use in most countries:

Alcohol
Benzodiazepines such as diazepam (Valium)
Cannabis products, e.g. marijuana, hashish and hashish oil
Dissociatives such as dextromethorphan (DXM), phencyclidine (pcp), and ketamine
Hallucinogens such as LSD, mescaline, peyote, and psilocybin
Opium, opiates such as heroin and morphine, and opioids such as codeine, hydrocodone (Vicodin), methadone, and oxycodone (Percocet, Oxycontin)
Sedatives such as GHB, and methaqualone (Quaalude)
Stimulants such as amphetamines (Adderall, Dexedrine), coca leaves and their derivative cocaine, MDMA (Ecstasy), methamphetamines, methcathinone, methylphenidate (Ritalin), and nicotine
The regulation of the above drugs varies in many countries; cannabis and hashish, for example, are sometimes legal for personal use, though not sale. In some countries Dextromethorphan is available in ordinary over-the-counter products such as cough medicines. Alcohol possession and consumption by adults is today banned only in Islamic countries and various parts of India. The United States, Finland, and Canada banned alcohol in the early part of the 20th century; this was called Prohibition. Tobacco is not illegal for adults in any country, with the notable exception of Bhutan. In some parts of the world, provisions are made for the use of traditional sacraments like Ayahuasca, Iboga, and Peyote.

In countries where alcohol and tobacco are legal, certain measures are frequently undertaken to discourage use of these drugs. For example, packages of alcohol and tobacco sometimes communicate warnings directed towards the consumer, communicating the potential risks of partaking in the use of the substance. These drugs also frequently have special sin taxes associated with the purchase thereof, in order to recoup the losses associated with public funding for the health problems the use causes in long-term users. Restrictions on advertising also exist in many countries, and often a state holds a monopoly on manufacture, distribution, marketing and/or the sale of these drugs.

In the United States, there is considerable legal debate about the impact these laws have had on Americans' civil rights. Critics claim that the War on Drugs has lowered the evidentiary burden required for a legal search of a suspect's dwelling or vehicle, or to intercept a suspect's communications. However, many of the searches that result in drug arrests are often "consent searches" where an arresting officer does not have probable cause or a warrant, but has asked for and received permission to search a person or the person's property.

The sentencing statutes in the United States Code that cover controlled substances are notorious for their illogical and incoherent structure. For example, a first-time offender convicted in a single proceeding for selling marijuana three times, and found to have simply carried a gun on him all three times (but did not use it), is subject to a minimum sentence of 55 years in federal prison. U.S. v. Angelos, 345 F. Supp. 2d 1227 (D. Utah 2004).

Sometimes, crimes not directly related to drug use and sale are prohibited. For example, the United States recently brought charges against club owners for maintaining a place of business where a) Ecstasy is known to be frequently consumed; b) paraphernalia associated with the use of Ecstasy is sold and/or widely tolerated (such as glow sticks and pacifiers); and c) "chill-out rooms" are created, where Ecstasy users can cool down (Ecstasy raises the user's blood temperature). These are being challenged in court by organizations such as the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and Drug Policy Alliance.

Many countries allow the use of undercover law enforcement officers solely or primarily for the enforcement of laws against recreational use of certain drugs. Many of these officers are allowed to commit crimes if it is necessary to maintain the secrecy of the investigation, or in order to collect adequate evidence for a conviction. Some people have criticized this practice as failing to ensure equality under the law because it grants police officers the right to commit crimes that no other citizen could commit without potential consequences.

The War on Drugs has stimulated the creation of international law enforcement agencies (such as Interpol), mostly in Western countries. This has occurred because a large volume of illicit drugs come from Third-World countries.


References
Abel, Ernest L., Marijuana -- The First Twelve Thousand Years, 1980. [1] (http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/hemp/history/first12000/abel.htm)
Buhner, Stephen Harrod, Sacred and Herbal Healing Beers: The Secrets of Ancient Fermentation, Sirius Books, 1998.
Hops: The Bitter Herb. [2] (http://www.greydragon.org/library/hops.html)
Leavitt, Fred. (2003) The REAL Drug Abusers. Rowman & Littlefield.
McCoy, A. (1991) The Politics of Heroin. Lawrence Hill Books.
Miller, R. (1996) Drug Warriors and Their Prey. Praeger.

See also
Legal issues of cannabis
Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs

External links
Drug Policy Alliance (http://www.drugpolicy.org/homepage.cfm)
Transform Drug Policy Foundation (http://www.tdpf.org.uk/)
After the War on Drugs: Options for Control (Report) (http://www.tdpf.org.uk/Transform_After_the_War_on_Drugs.pdf)
Partnership for Drug Freedom in America (http://deoxy.org/pdfa/index.htm)
The Drug War as a Socialist Enterprise by Milton Friedman (http://www.druglibrary.org/special/friedman/socialist.htm)


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlineeve69
--=..Did Adam and ...?=--
Male User Gallery

Registered: 04/30/03
Posts: 3,855
Loc: isle de la muerte Flag
Last seen: 19 days, 9 hours
Re: The modern opium war. [Re: LSDempire]
    #4486606 - 08/02/05 08:40 PM (11 years, 4 months ago)

This hearing will examine, among other things, how opium production in Afghanistan not only undermines Afghan reconstruction but also fuels Islamist terror groups, including the Taliban, HIG(see footnote 1) and, according to recent reports, Al-Qaida itself.

President Karzai has warned of the links between Afghan heroin and terrorism and has publicly stated that Afghan drug money is ''feeding . . . terrorism.'' In testimony before this Committee in April of 2002, the Administrator of the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) spoke of the presence of ''narco-terrorism'' in Afghanistan, which senior Afghan government officials have echoed. The Administrator also noted that DEA had received ''multi-source information that bin Laden has suspected involvement in the financing and facilitation of heroin trafficking activities.''

According to the United Nations Office of Drugs and Crime (UNODC), opium production accounts for over 50 percent of Afghanistan's gross domestic product (GDP), generating an estimated $2 billion annually in economic activity. The Afghan government believes that 30 percent of families are involved in some form of opium cultivation and production.

This production and associated crime and terror undermine security and pose a grave potential for massive, drug-related corruption at all levels in the fledgling government in Kabul. With national elections looming and a small national police force and army still in training, an expanding drug economy threatens to defeat the stability to Afghanistan and the region for which we and our allies have sacrificed so much.


Page 14 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
The numbers are staggering. An estimated 70 percent of the world's opium production originates in Afghanistan, with an annual production of 3,600 tons . This generates 360 tons of morphine and heroin and vast amounts of illicit monies ripe for the taking by Al-Qaida, the Taliban, and their terrorist allies.

For instance, recently reported seizures of several vessels carrying Afghan drugs in the Persian Gulf had an estimated street value of $11 million dollars. Earlier seizures of Afghan drugs in Turkey worth hundreds of millions of dollars may also have been linked to Al-Qaida and the Taliban.

We don't know how much Al-Qaida can clear from facilitating or sponsoring any given drug transaction, but certainly the possibility of immense illegal profit exists with significant strategic consequences. Al-Qaida is nothing if not flexible as it raises funds and, as I hardly need add, it respects no law?including Islamic law.

It should be evident to everyone that we and our allies neglect the Afghan drug problem at our peril. We clearly have a possible ''narco-terrorist'' state in the making in Afghanistan, with all that means for our short- and long-term strategic and security interests.

On October 30th, I wrote Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld to express my growing concerns about Afghanistan and the impact of illicit drugs on the fight against global terrorism. I am particularly grateful to have DoD representatives here today to provide testimony on this difficult and challenging problem.

Let me make clear that I do not want our military forces, already tasked with vital counterterrorism and stability operations, to become Afghanistan's anti-narcotics police.

Page 15 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC

http://commdocs.house.gov/committees/intlrel/hfa91798.000/hfa91798_0.htm


--------------------
...or something







Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Invisibleafoaf
CEO DBK?
 User Gallery

Registered: 11/08/02
Posts: 32,665
Loc: Ripple's Heart
Re: The modern opium war. [Re: LSDempire]
    #4487251 - 08/02/05 11:57 PM (11 years, 4 months ago)

some cubans like the stalinist lifestyle.

are you their new messiah or something?


--------------------
All I know is The Growery is a place where losers who get banned here go.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Invisibleshatt
Thats "Sirshatt" to you.
Registered: 08/01/05
Posts: 19
Re: The modern opium war. [Re: LSDempire]
    #4488862 - 08/03/05 10:03 AM (11 years, 4 months ago)

So, lets get this straight. You say that this:

Quote:

LSDempire said:
"Bush aids and abets the opium trade!

The LA Times reports today that the current opium harvest in Afghanistan is expected to set a record as the biggest harvest ever!
(The folling commentary is not from the Times, tho some of the data is.)

The Taliban had almost completely snuffed out opium growing, going so far as to execute entire families who farmed opium. Under the American occupation...oh excuse me...allied occupation LOL...the opium trade has boomed.

Guess where the opium/heroin is going to end up? On the streets of Europe and America.

This makes George Bush an accomplice to the drug trade, in my opinion.

Msongs
Riverside CA
click my name for Dean and anti Bush shirts
(sorry, have to get your heroin from the republicans hehe)"

http://www.blogforamerica.com/archives/003630.html

This fascist seems to be trying to say that Bush is soft in the war on drugs, because he thinks killing entire families is going to far? I hate Bush because he supports the war on drugs and fused it with the war on terror, But if this guy likes the Taliban as much as I think he does I hate him a lot more. Nixon rewarded China with open trade because they also killed entire families in order to stomp out the opium trade. The only thing that shocks me more than this article is the number of hypocrites that support the war on drugs on this forum, they include DieCommie, Psychoactive1984 (his name shows you what a hypocrite he is), zappaisgod, CaptainJailew, and RandalFlagg. These hypocrites and fascists will stop at nothing to shut me up, which is one of the reasons I keep posting.




actually means this:

Quote:

LSDempire said:No, I am saying the government Afghanistan has now is better than the Taliban in the same way the US government is better than the Chinese government, but that does not mean there is not more that can be done to improve the governments in question.




If so, then why not say what you meant to say in the first place?


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Jump to top. Pages: 1

Amazon Shop for: Ayahuasca, DXM, Hemp, San Pedro

General Interest >> Political Discussion

Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* Blair's new opium war Alex213 790 5 01/05/06 06:20 PM
by downforpot
* Afghanistan biggest opium crop in history - Taliban rejoice
( 1 2 all )
Alex213 1,539 20 05/13/06 03:33 AM
by Alex213
* Governments in need of regime change.
( 1 2 all )
LSDempire 2,429 38 08/29/05 09:21 AM
by LSDempire
* Ending prohibition, how can we help? IsaacHunt 1,474 12 08/02/05 07:04 AM
by LSDempire
* Bush administration rewarded the Taliban for 'controlling' the opium crop! LSDempire 1,178 14 08/29/05 11:54 PM
by Redstorm
* War people, why do you support the war?
( 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 all )
rhizo 5,508 145 07/05/06 11:56 AM
by Phred
* Is the drug war anti-capitalist?
( 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 all )
Learyfan 9,037 151 08/12/04 12:49 PM
by CJay
* war in afghanistan and opiate usage
( 1 2 all )
Krishna 1,337 33 03/29/09 10:01 PM
by Meepity

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Prisoner#1, Enlil
1,395 topic views. 0 members, 0 guests and 9 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Toggle Favorite | Print Topic | Stats ]
Search this thread:
World Seed Supply
Please support our sponsors.

Copyright 1997-2016 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.117 seconds spending 0.004 seconds on 14 queries.