The only thing drug gangs fear is legalisation

Look carefully at that mound of butchered corpses found yesterday. They are the inevitable and ineluctable product of drug prohibition. This will keep happening for as long as we pursue this policy. If you believe the way to deal with the human appetite for intoxication is to criminalise and militarise, then blood is on your hands.

Yesterday, 72 immigrants from Central America were murdered in Mexico by the Zeta cartel, in what any specialist in humanitarian law would call genocide.

This terrible war on drugs is being fed by the insatiable appetite for drugs in the US and Europe. I think the issue is quite simple: if you want drugs, you'll get them, regardless of them being legalized or not. All you need to do is go to a street corner in the correct neighborhood.

All that prohibition does is create mafias and blackmarkets. This follows a very simple economics principle: when there is a demand, there will ALWAYS be a supply.

Therefore if -for arguments sake- the government legalizes drugs (and for instance, claims "monopoly" on their sale, so that only authorized outlets are allowed), paired with a strong "don't do drugs" campaign; in a brushstroke you've eliminated the black market, the mafias, the violence and created a big source of income and revenue (which, for instance, can be destined to rehab, or social security, or whatever).

The following article published today in the Independent makes this point more elegantly and in a better fashion than me.

Violence breeds violence. The only thing drug gangs fear is legalisation.


The question then would be why isn't this being considered in the higher spheres of government? The answer is plain and simple: follow the money. Someone in the high echelons is profiting BIG TIME from this 40 billion dollars a year market.

What do you guys think?

First of all ask yourself why we are in afganistan???
Then ask yourself why did the poppy heroin production increas during this time of military occupation???

Drugs are used as a black market income of our goverment and other govs as well and at the same time it is a small form of population control.

They will never legalize drugs under the basis of they who can are the same that will lose $$$ from this.

reply to post by RadioKnecht


Because it will put them outta bussiness if things were legal. But it will also put people who are police-judges-prisons AND jail workers and LAWYERS SMH from having any real jobs a we ALL KNOW without the crime there is no need for such an extensive legal system world wide... Crazy how this ish works..



[edit on 8/26/10 by Ophiuchus 13]

Bootlegging is illegal. I remember there being plenty of bootleggers but since the stores are now open on Sunday and open late you can't find a bootlegger. Society supplies the demand and the criminals are out of business. Simple.

drugs will not be legalized...for one reason and one reason alone.

IT FUNDS THE CIA

the previous poster was absolutely right....the poppy production in afghanistan has gone up and that is parlty why it was necessary to go into Afghanistan....The evil Taliban had almost had he poppy production under control and that is a bad thing cause the CIA drug lords were losing control.

Same reason why Noriega had to be taken out cause the CIA was losing control of the drug cartels.

That is why America is soooo against legalizing drugs and they get fortunes of unaccountable income coming in through the CIA.

you can't fund black ops... using taxpayers money can you...the money trail could be followed.

the OP makes very valid points....but the point is....the CIA is funded on Illegal drug monies and that is not going to change.

WAR ON DRUGS
WAR ON TERRORISM

does that sound familiar.

CHEERS.



[edit on 033131p://f44Thursday by plube]

[edit on 033131p://f45Thursday by plube]

That's precisely the point!

Here are some hard facts:

55.6% of people aged 18-25 have admitted to having done drugs

8% of the population aged 12 and over have admitted to doing drugs on a regular basis (i.e. are drug addicts). That is over 24 MILLION people!!

I mean, it is the human nature to indulge in substance abuse. Always has been. Always will be. Criminalization won't turn us away from getting our highs. This was proven time and again during the prohibition.

The point then is, either the government is being naive and paternalistic (telling us what is good for us and what isn't) thinking the demand for drugs will simply vanish as we evolve to being a better, higher society (yeah, right), or is actually cashing in big time of the drug trade.

Either way, I believe it is absolutely cynical and murderous of the government to criminalize the use of drugs, creating thus the black market that feeds the drug cartels to keep on growing to gargantuan proportions, only to give millionaire handouts to the Mexican and Colombian governments to fight the drug cartels and drug production.

[edit on 26-8-2010 by RadioKnecht]

I think anyone who is unaware of the fact that drugs are run by intelligence agencies (everywhere, not just the CIA) is ignorant. Don't look for legalization anytime soon. In fact, don't look for it ever.

reply to post by time91


I did pick on the CIA as the biggest drug dealers but your right it is many many goverment agencies from different places all over the world.

Cant be funding covert operations with money that can be followed.....it wouldn't be very covert if that were the case now would it.

reply to post by plube


That is why its so appealing. Not to mention its the most profitable operation on earth, with the possible exceptions of oil and banking itself.
There isn't much on other intelligence agencies, but you should look up 'red coc aine' if you get a chance, its about the KGB drug trade, among other things.

Originally posted by time91
I think anyone who is unaware of the fact that drugs are run by intelligence agencies (everywhere, not just the CIA) is ignorant. Don't look for legalization anytime soon. In fact, don't look for it ever.

I hear all that, friend! CIA drug running is pretty much common knowledge now, isn't it? I would say, but could not prove, that all of the three letter agencies have a drug scam of some kind, with today's economy like it is, getting giant budgets from Congress isn't so easy anymore. And ever since "Nam it was seen that you cannot have a war without controlling the drug trade. I know the Mexican Cartels are making big bucks right now, but who controls them, I wonder? I too would like to see an oversight committee follow the money here.

I'm glad you're all catching my drift. The aim I had when creating this thread, was to shed some light on who is behind the drug trade IN the US of A.

I mean, you hear all the time that some hot shot drug dealer was caught in Mexico, or that another capo was killed in actions by the Mexican army. However, let's not forget that there has to be someone in the US that takes in all the dope that comes from the south, distributes it and makes a huge profit. For every Mexican capo, there has to be an American one dealing everything.

Howcome we never hear that an American drug dealer, the size of Mexican Chapo Guzman or Colombian Pablo Escobar, is caught? How is it possible that no one is even asking this questions?

I really believe that this is something that deserves to be delved further into!

I think youre 100% correct.

There are too many powerful people making way too much money for legalization. Just another example of just how corrupt our government is.
Not to mention the fact that the cia is involved with smuggling and dealing illegal drugs.

Dont forget that all those illegal drug dealers need to be arrested and put in jail too. With more and more prisons becoming privately owned, there are billions more to be made.

The major problems of this country will never be fixed by our government when they are benefitting from them. Its one issue on a long list of things that should be fixed but wont. They only care about their own well being, not any of the citizens of this country.

If it were to ever happen, i think there would be a lot less other crimes being committed like murder and theft. Lets hope something will happen to allow real change to happen.

reply to post by Ashes of the wake


Indeed you're right!! Drug dealing is a round deal for the government: it generates ridiculous amounts of money for the folks in the highest echelons, funds black ops the world over, it feeds the overcrowded penitentiary and criminal system that in turn requires more tax payer's money, in a positive feedback loop that never ends.

Star for you!

If drugs were legalised it certainly wouldn't improve the situation.

Legalisation=Taxiation.

Drugs would be a source of income for treasuries worldwide but you would still get illegal production and smuggling due to high taxiation.Also you would get alphabet agencies world wide still involved,trying to undercut legitimate sources of supply.

Also gangs such as Los Zetas(who have military spec equipment) will never voluntary give up thier lucative buisness.If they do at all it will be because they have found something more profitable.

just my pennysworth

Originally posted by autowrench

I hear all that, friend! CIA drug running is pretty much common knowledge now, isn't it?

On ATS, it probably is, but not the world in general. Before I came to ATS, a friend of mine (who introduced me to the site) made his own conspiracy website on Geocities. A few of his articles talked about the CIA drug trade, amongst other things. He asked me what I thought of the site and I told him at the time that I thought those 'theories' were all completely bonkers and totally ridiculous, because at the time my thinking was much more in line with the mainstream sheeple and I'd never heard of such things, therefore I couldn't imagine them being true. But, being inquisitive, I dug around a bit, and found out about the Iran Contra affair, and found out the CIA really did trade in drugs.

On a slightly humorous note, I once read a comic strip where there was a scene with a presidential candidate and a drug cartel leader. The cartel guy asks the candidate 'what is your stance on drug legislation?' The candidate starts shaking in fear, but then decides to go with his conscience, and says that he is against it. The cartel leader surprises him by being overjoyed, saying that he is also against it, as it keeps prices way up, and promises to donate to the campaign. It's a fictional scenario, but it makes you wonder whether deals like that are really going on?

reply to post by DragonsDemesne


Well, there's actually more to the joke you posted. It actually is an anecdote. From the John Hari's article quoted in the OP:

Like Capone, the drug gangs love the policy of prohibition. Michael Levine, who had a 30-year career as one of America's most distinguished federal narcotics agents, penetrated to the very top of the Mafia Cruenza, one of the biggest drug-dealing gangs in the world in the 1980s.

Its leaders told him "that not only did they not fear our war on drugs, they actually counted on it... On one undercover tape-recorded conversation, a top cartel chief, Jorge Roman, expressed his gratitude for the drug war, calling it 'a sham put on the American tax-payer' that was 'actually good for business'."

Once again, prohibition creates black markets and violent mafias. The drug trade should be monopolized by the state, and sold at a sufficiently low price, so as to make it no longer a business for the cartels and drug dealers.

This was what brought to its knees the alcohol bootlegging mafias in the 20's-30's.

Btw, Im glad this is turning out into such a well informed and inteligent debate.

Yup... With out a shadow of doubt, the reason why gangs are as powerful as they are is because of the drugs.

All one has to do is ponder the astronomical money pharmaceutical companies waltz away with, while lobbying against everything that is 'anti-script'.

It's the same thing with gangs. They have a product that is possibly the thing most highest in demand next to oil. We put all these fences up, tell people no more illegal stuff, just the stuff Doctors and health professionals recommend.

Lets see here the main argument against drugs is what?

They threaten 'our' health and 'our' well being. It is 'us' they are looking out for.

If only the whole world could take at least one inhale off a marijuana cigarette and see, it is no way even close as devastating to both your well being and health than the demon that is alcohol.

How come they spend the most amount of money on the restriction and seizure of marijuana? What is it about a silly plant that they are sooo scared of, and we all too, should be scared of.

Its the world of double standards folks. This is okay, but this is not. Okay?

I have seen friends get addicted to prescription drugs, and it is very disturbing to say the least when you watch Oxycontin ruin someones life and their identity. These are pills that doctors suggest in cases of severe pain or chronic pain.

So you have to think, if we allow people to ingest a liquid that could lead you to an event like getting in a multi car crash and kill a whole family on their way from a Sunday night dinner, all because of a legal substance. People can ingest a few whiskeys and beat their wife with out reason, with no question of the harms of alcohol versus any of the other illegal drugs? If pharm companies are allowed to use nasty chemicals that alter our brains just as severely as many of the illegal drugs. Why is any mind altering substance illegal?

Oh yes and I could not have possibly mentioned, the amount of not just tobacco but the extra non essential chemicals they put into it? Hey were free right? We're allowed to kill our selves slowly day by day puff by puff. Well as long as it's the right plant. God forbid you smoke what you thought was one of your teenage sons 'cigarettes' only to be left on your couch questioning your whole life and everything around you. Bah, who would ever permit the use of a plant that could open your mind to the entire world.
Nope, you gotta keep smoking the cigarettes or should I say Chemical sticks for 10$ a day.


Why?

Why?

And one more time...

Why?

Well my friends as sad as it is to say....
They are not good for the health and well being of who???

???

???

???

Oh right. THE PHARMACEUTICAL AND ALCOHOL AND TOBACCO COMPANIES.


So you see ladies and gentlemen this has nothing to do with OUR HEALTH and OUR WELL BEING...

It is just the hands of the pharm in your feds chest pocket.

This is why I support the legalization of Cannabis in my state come November. (Note: I am not endorsing or discussing the use of prohibited substances in violation of the terms of service. I am expressing my support for the legalization of one of those substances.) In addition to the reasons cited in this thread, it doesn't make logical sense to me that cigarettes and alcohol - known to directly lead to death for a variety of reasons - are legal and taxed, yet Cannabis - known to carry some but not even close to all of the risks associated with tobacco smoking and having medically acknowledged and documented health benefits besides - is still illegal.

[edit on 8/27/2010 by AceWombat04]

Just like when alcohol prohibition was ended, they will be forced to do other things. I posted some drug war gore and it was deleted and I was chastised. I guess the moderator just didn't like me. My drug war gore had cops cutting the head off of a guy. Oh, if anyone does not know, the cops are behind the drug war violence. Our American agents gave them the reins. I would try and post the video again but it would just get dumped in the trash.

It's very simple.

Prohibition does not work, and simply criminalises non-criminals, as well as criminals.

Put another way, half the political families in the US would not have a "dynasty" if alcohol prohibition had not been in effect when it was.

Put yet another way, if non-criminals stopped being criminalised, then the private companies that run prisons would not be making such massive profits.

Put yet ANOTHER way, without prohibition, the CIA (and other alphabet agencies) would not be able to run non-accountable "black ops"

Another point is that without prohibition, troops would probably not be in certain areas of Afghanistan, or supporting certain areas of Pakistan.